TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 1983
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the appellant is a manufacturer of paddy parboiling unit and dryer unit for rice mills and clearing the same classifying under Chapter 8437 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 2.1 The Revenue is of the view that the said machineries are classified under Chapter 8419 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 2.2 Therefore, proceedings were initiated for the appellant vide issuance of show-cause notice dated 19.08.2014 for the period 1st June, 2009 to 18th May, 2014. 2.3 The matter was adjudicated. The goods in question held to be classified under Central Excise Tariff Heading 8419 demanding duty from the appellant. 2.4 Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. The ld. Sr. Advocate for the appellant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arly, he submits that as the Circular has been issued on 15.05.2014 and this Tribunal in the case of Jyoti Sales Corporation (Supra), has categorically held that prior to 15.05.2014, the goods are to be classified under Chapter Heading 8437 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, but from 15.05.2014 onwards, it is classified under Chapter Heading 8419. Therefore, the correct classification for the clearance on 15.05.2014 is under Chapter Heading 8419, accordingly, for the clearance of the said day, the appellant is liable to pay duty. 5. Heard both the parties and considered the submissions. 6. As discussed in the case of Dulichand Technico, where this Tribunal has observed as under : "6. We find that the issue of classificat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....when lays down presentation by an elector within 45 days from a particular date. While relying upon the Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which provides for commencement and termination of time in any Central Act or Regulation, if the words 'from' and 'to' are used, the first day is to be excluded and last date is to be included. In the context of above, in Tarun Prasad Chatterjee's case (supra), following observations have been made :- "7. This question came up for consideration in K. Venkateswara Rao v. Bekkam Narasimha Reddi, AIR 1969 SC 872, and it was held that Sections 9 and 10 of the General Clauses Act would apply in computing the period of limitation under Sec. 81(1) of the R.P. Act, 1951. It was observed in Para....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on. It was also urged that the legislative mandate is that the election petition should be filed within 45 days from the date of election of the returned candidate and not earlier than the said date or after 45 days of the said date. On these premises, it was argued that Sec. 9 has no application in the instant case. 10. Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 gives statutory recognition to the well-established principle applicable to the construction of statutes that ordinarily in computing the period of time prescribed, the rule observed is to exclude the first and include the last day. 11. In Halsbury Laws of England, 37th Edition, Volume 3, page 92, it is stated as follows :- "Days included or excluded - Wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r to exclude the first day of the period, the crucial thing to be noted is whether the period of limitation is delimited by a series of days or by any fixed period. This is intended to obviate the difficulties or inconvenience that may be caused to some parties. For instance, if a policy of insurance has to be good for one day from the 1st January, it might be valid only for a few hours after its execution and the party or the beneficiary in the insurance policy would not get reasonable time to lay claim, unless the 1st January is excluded from the period of computation. 13. It was argued that the language used in Sec. 81(1) that "within forty-five days from, but not earlier than the date of election of the returned candidate" expr....