1997 (2) TMI 198 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Whether hospital stainless steel utensils are eligible for the benefit of concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 53/84-C.E., dated 1-3-1984.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of hospital stainless steel utensils for the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 53/84-C.E. The respondents, engaged in manufacturing stainless steel utensils, claimed the benefit of the concessional rate under the said notification for hospital utensils. The Assistant Collector initially denied the benefit, arguing that hospital utensils are not used in households or kitchens. The respondents appealed to the Collector (Appeals), who overturned the Assistant Collector's decision. The Commissioner then filed the present appeal challenging the Collector (Appeals) decision.

The main contention raised by the Departmental Representative (DR) was that there is a distinction between hospital utensils and ordinary utensils, and the term 'utensil' should not cover hospitalware. The DR argued that since hospital utensils are different from ordinary utensils, the concessional rate of duty should not apply to them. On the other hand, the Company Representative contended that the ISI Specification clearly categorized the items as hospital utensils, which were essentially stainless steel utensils used for a specific purpose in hospitals. The Company Representative emphasized that the term 'utensil' was not defined in the notification, so the common parlance test and ISI Specification should be considered to determine eligibility.

Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal analyzed Notification No. 53/84, which exempted goods specified in the Schedule, including stainless steel utensils, from excess excise duty. The key question was whether hospital utensils could be considered as stainless steel utensils under the notification. While the Assistant Collector relied on the Oxford Concise Dictionary definition of 'utensil' to exclude hospitalware, the Tribunal referred to Webster's Dictionary, which defined 'utensil' broadly to include various vessels or devices beyond household items. The Tribunal noted that the ISI Specification referred to the items as hospital utensils, confirming they were stainless steel utensils. Considering the absence of a specific definition in the notification and the broad meaning of 'utensil,' the Tribunal upheld the Collector (Appeals) decision, ruling that the hospital utensils qualified for the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 53/84. Therefore, the appeal filed by the Commissioner was rejected, affirming the decision in favor of the respondents.