TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1986 (4) TMI 51
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... excise duty under Entry 27(e) of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 2. The appellant, The Union Carbide India Limited, is a public limited company and carries on the business of the manufacture and sale of flashlights (torches), dry cell batteries, chemicals and plastics. The flashlights are manufactured by one of its Divisions, the Eveready Flashlight Company, Lucknow. The appellant purchases aluminium slugs from the manufacturers of aluminium in India and produces aluminium cans or torch bodies at its factory by a process of extrusion. Before March 1, 1970 aluminium cans were subjected to basic excise duty at 20 per cent ad valorem plus special duty at 20 per cent of the basic duty on a value of Rs. 8,600 pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xcise authorities. 4. The appellant filed a writ petition in the High Court of Allahabad for a mandamus directing the excise authorities not to levy and collect excise duty on aluminium cans, and to refund the excise duty levied and collected from the appellant on aluminium cans from March 1, 1965. A learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the writ petition by his judgment and order dated April 15, 1971, but on appeal by the Union of India, a Division Bench of the High Court reversed the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge and dismissed the writ petition on February 22, 1972. Before the learned Judges an attempt was made by the appellant to show that the process employed in the preparation of the aluminium cans could no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uced in India......", and it is now well accepted that excise duty is an indirect tax, in which the burden of the imposition is passed on to the ultimate consumer. In that context, the expression "goods manufactured or produced" must refer to articles which are capable of being sold to a consumer. In Union of India v. Delhi Cloth & General Mills - 1963 Supp. I S.C.R. 586 = 1977 E.L.T. (J 199), this Court considered the meaning of the expression "goods" for the purposes of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and observed that "to become `goods' an article must be something which can ordinarily come to the market to be brought and sold", a definition which was reiterated by this Court in South Bihar Sugar Mills Ltd., etc. v. Union of India....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rence has been made by the respondents to the instance when aluminium cans were ordered by the appellant from Messrs. Krupp Group of Industries. This took place, however, in 1966 as a solitary instance, and what happened was that aluminium slugs were provided by the appellant to Messrs. Krupp Group of Industries for extrusion into aluminium cans. The facts show that the transaction was a works contract and nothing more. Apparently, the appellant made use of the requisite machinery owned by that firm for extruding aluminium cans. Not a single instance has been provided by the respondents demonstrating that such aluminium cans have a market. The record discloses that whatever aluminium cans are produced by the appellant are subsequently devel....