Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1989 (11) TMI 147

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d. IFFIUNIK purchased two boilers and as it was required to install these boilers at some distance from its plant and it had limited land area, the appellant permitted IFFIUNIK to install its two boilers in the appellant s boiler room. These two boilers are connected by pipelines to the IFFIUNIK s factory only. As contended by the appellant, IFFIUNIK manufacture its steam in these two boilers for consumption in its factory. 2. The jurisdictional Assistant Collector visited the appellant s factory on 28-9-1983 and thereafter the Range Superintendent visited the appellant s factory and made a panchnama and statements of concerned persons were recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excises Salt Act, 1944 (herein referred to as the Act). .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The appellant had filed a classification list dated 27-7-1982 declaring that it used steam produced by it in its factory for captive consumption and the same was approved by the jurisdictional Assistant Collector. IFFIUNIK filed its classification list on 11-10-1982 and mentioned therein production of steam for captive consumption and claimed exemption from payment of C.E. duty. 5. The Ld. Collector came to the conclusion that during the period, in question, the appellant had produced steam in the boilers owned by the IFFIUNIK and had supplied the same to the IFFIUNIK and so as the appellant was the manufacturer of the steam, it was liable to pay C.E. duty, relying upon the following evidence: (i) The appellant was not charging any ren .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it notes, use of water and LDO of the assessee company and payment to labourers by it are not in dispute. But only on this evidence, it cannot be said that the appellant company was the real manufacturer of the steam. The term manufacturer is not specifically defined in the Act, but relevant portion of Section 2F reads as under: and the word manufacturer shall be construed accordingly and shall include not only a person who employs hired labour in the production or manufacturer of excisable goods, but also any person who engages in their production or manufacture on his own account." 8. The definition is more descriptive or illustrative in nature. So, as per this definition, it is not necessary for a person to be regarded as a manu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... consumption of water and LDO would not necessarily suggest that the appellant company was manufacturing the steam. One company can help other company even gratis and there is no legal bar to that. It is true that debit notes for consumption of oil were issued by the appellant company to the IFFIUNIK after the visit of the Central Excise officers to the factory of the appellant company. But when the debit notes are, in fact, issued, there is no reason to disbelieve them. So, in our view, it is not conclusively established that during the relevant period, the steam was manufactured by the appellant company. 9. L.A., Shri Lakshmi Kumaran, has pointed out that calculation of the steam produced made by the Ld. Collector, is also not correct b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and used for captive consumption. Now, there were no other boilers except the boilers, in question, from which steam consumed by IFFIUNIK was produced and it also appears that IFFIUNIK had, in their classification list, put remarks exempted vide Notification No. 118/75, dated 1-3-1975 (captive consumption) . Now, it is obvious that when a manufacturer claims exemption under notification, the departmental authorities, before taking any decision for the approval of the classification list, have to ascertain about the correctness of description, etc. of the product contended to be manufactured and also about the use to which it is to be put. So, it is obvious that the departmental authorities must have verified all these facts and at that ti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates