Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1994 (11) TMI 133

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....By Notification No. 265/77, dated 3rd August, 1977, glassware manufactured manually were fully exempted from payment of excise duty. Notification No. 266/77 applied to other glassware. Both these notifications were superseded by Notification No. 330/77 and Notification No. 329/77 was issued which granted partial exemption of duty over and above 18% ad valorem to glassware produced manually and 24% ad valorem to glassware produced by semi-automatic process. The appellant in the classification list submitted to the Department claimed that the glassware manufactured by it was covered under Serial No. 3 of Notification No. 329/77. This classification list was approved by the Assistant Collector. However, on 23rd August 1978 a show cause notice ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Notification No. 329/77 is extracted below : "Glassware including tableware produced by Semi-automatic process, that is to say, where molten glass is taken to the first mould manually and where either compressed air or mechanically operated press is used." None of the authorities disputed that in the manufacturing process the molten glass was taken by the appellant to the first mould manually. Nor there was any dispute that the compressed air was used by the appellant. The narrow difference arose whether the compressed air was used in the first or the second mould. The appellant admitted that it was used in the second mould for giving the final shape. According to Tribunal the Notification exempted only those glassware where molten ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... covered in the Notification. If the intention would have been to confine it to first mould that it was not necessary to use `where' a second time. It is disjunctive and has been used to denote the same meaning, namely, if in processing of it compressed air is used then it is deemed to be a production by semi-automatic process. The Tribunal in reading the words `where either compressed air or mechanically operated press' along with the earlier expression `first mould' committed an error of law. The two requirements are quite distinct. The one requires the glass to be taken to the first mould manually. Once that was found, that request stood satisfied. But to be covered in the expression `semi-automatic process' the glassware was further req....