TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Parliament never intended, the literal meaning must prevail. In this case, if we go by a very literal interpretation, the Revenue is correct. If law and the rules framed are interpreted with mathematical rigour, then a computer can be programmed to administer law. There will not be any need for human beings. The law is for the society and society is not for the law. After all, procedures are handmaidens of law and not the other way. Another way of interpreting law is, looking into its spirit. In our view, we have to go into the spirit of the relevant Notification and the Rules and come to a decision. It is true that the respondent imported the goods for use in their factory at Bangalore. This is not in doubt. Business environment has its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 001. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows : The respondents viz. M/s. Electronics Research Ltd., Bangalore, imported goods by availing Customs Exemption Notification No. 13/97-Cus. dated 1-3-1997 for use in the manufacture of Deflection Yokes on concessional rate of duty. The procedure for availing exemption is prescribed in Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. The respondents have another factory at Gurgaon. Due to labour unrest in their Bangalore factory during December 1998, the respondent transferred a part of the imported goods to their Gurgaon factory. Revenue proceeded against the respondent. The original authority confirmed duty demand of Rs. 3,33,788/- and l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar, the learned Advocate appeared for the Respondents. 5. The learned SDR submitted that from the order of the Commissioner (A), it is not very clear that how he satisfied himself that the goods had been used for the intended purpose simply by perusing copy of RG 23A Part-I II. Moreover, as per the rules and the Notification, the imported goods should be used only in the Bangalore factory, which is the factory of the importer. There is absolutely no provision for diverting the goods. The factory at Gurgaon was not registered. There is no certificate from the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner regarding the utilisation of the goods. Hence, he requested that the OIA may be set aside. 6. The learned Advocate for the res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined. 5. Decision of the Tribunal in CCE v. Indchem Electronics - 2003 (151) E.L.T. 393 (T) Inputs issued for manufacture and destroyed in fire accident - Denial of Modvat credit unjustified 7. We have gone through the records of the case carefully. The Commissioner (A) has examined the issue in the proper perspective. There are broadly two ways of interpreting law. The first approach would be to go by the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words. In this approach, one sticks to the letter of the law. According to this approach, even if the interpretation gives rise to unjust results, which Parliament never intended, the literal meaning must prevail. In this case, if we go by a very literal interpretation, the Revenue is correct. If law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n used for the intended purpose. It is also not the case of the department that the goods have been used for some other purpose, not mentioned in the notification. The case laws cited by the learned Advocate are very relevant for this appeal. In our view, the Commissioner (A)'s order has no infirmity and Revenue's appeal is devoid of merit. Before parting, we would like to quote the following extract from 'the Closing Chapter' by Lord Dening (Page 97). Sticking to the letter (i) The old way In the middle of the 19th century the judges spoke of a 'golden rule' by which statutes were to be interpreted according to the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words. Even if it gave rise to unjust results which Parliament n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That is the same thing as looking for its 'purpose'. They do it in this way: they go by the words of the section. If they are clear and cover the situation in hand, there is no need to go further. But, if they are unclear or ambiguous or doubtful, the judges do not stop at the words of the section. They call for help in every direction open to them. They look at the statute as a whole. They look at the social conditions which gave rise to it. They look at the mischief which it was passed to remedy. They look at the 'factual matrix'. They use every legitimate aid. By this means they clear up many things which would be unclear or ambiguous or doubtful. 8. In view of what is stated above we uphold the OIA and reject the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
