TMI Blog1995 (12) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down under Notification No. 105/80 and on account of this, a demand amounting to Rs. 9,23,687.65 was confirmed and a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on M/s. Electrical Fittings Equipment Pvt. Ltd. The other appellants M/s. Kumar Brothers have filed the appeal in respect of certain tube light fittings which were seized from them on the ground that they were non-duty paid and they were ordered confiscation but allowed redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 2,000/-. 2. After hearing the arguments on both the sides, we find the factual position as under : The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of empty patti which is the base for assembling of tube light fittings. There is no dispute that these empty pattis are manufactured with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exemption under Notification No. 179/77, since this is a contemporaneous exposition of law by the Department and would be uniformly applicable to all the similarly placed assessees, a different view is not permissible to be taken with regard to the appellants. 3. Shri Murugandi, the ld. DR. however, contends that the Board s Circular as well as the Law Ministry s opinion, if taken to logical conclusion, would lead to a situation where power can be used in the manufacture of various items upto the penultimate stage of the final product so long as the different stages result in manufacture of excisable goods with the aid of power. Such a concept is not approved by the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Standard Fire Works. In that case cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duction so long as the goods occurring at the intermediate stage are excisable and marketable as such. We feel that this view, apart from frustrating the objective of the Notification 179/77 would also seem to water down the view taken by the Supreme Court in the case cited supra. Whatever, be our view, the fact is clear that there was a contemporary exposition of law by the highest administrative body namely, Central Board of Excise and Customs, which was binding on all the Departmental Authorities. Similarly placed units would have got the benefit of these Board s instructions. In the facts and circumstances, we would not like to discriminate against the appellants by taking a different view. Moreover, Sh. Sreedharan s plea on the ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
