TMI Blog1994 (1) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant requires continuous supply of large quantities of sulphuric acid and the Appellant had accordingly installed 3 plants for the manufacture of sulphuric acid out of sulphur. Two of the plants were 50 tonnes per day (tpd) and the other plant was a 300 tpd plant. The first 50 tpd acid plant was put in 1961 and the second 50 tpd plant was put up in 1964. In connection with the substantial expansion of the titanium dioxide production a new 300 tpd sulphuric acid plant was commissioned in 1973 by the Appellant. (ii) All the above mentioned sulphuric acid plants were the conventional single absorption type. In a 300 tpd single absorption H2SO4 plant, ideally the minimum height required for the smoke stack so as to get a reasonable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of 25% of the aggregate licensed capacity for H2SO4 amounting to 1,08,000 tonnes per annum of the appellant, no fresh project licence was found necessary by the Department of Industries of the Government of India. However, the Appellant s application for import of the required imported components was recommended by DGTD and import licence was issued by the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports. (iv) The appellant through FEDO applied to the Assistant Collector for registration of their contract under Project Import (Registration of Contracts) Regulation, 1965 who rejected the application vide his order dated 30-4-82. (v) Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant filed an appeal to the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has relied upon 1984 (17) E.L.T. 525 [Collector of Customs v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.]. 4. Learned SDR for the Revenue opposing the contention of the learned advocate, has urged that the issue is no longer res integra - scope of the expression substantial expansion of an existing unit having been explained in 1987 (32) E.L.T. 153 [National Newsprint Paper Mills v. C.C., Bombay]. He draws attention to the views of the Hon ble President of the Tribunal in para 15 of his judgment in the said Report. It is reproduced below:- 15. Looking at the wording of the Tariff Heading No. 84.66 as it stood at the material time, it will be seen that it relates to machinery, etc., required for the initial setting up of a unit, or the substant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (12) E.L.T. 829 - both are Tribunal s decisions taking a view similar to that in 1987 (32) E.L.T. 153 that modernization and revamping do not mean substantial expansion. 5. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced from both sides. We are of the view that Tribunal s judgment reported in 1987 (32) E.L.T. 153 is a complete answer to the case of the appellant and is an authority against them. It has also noticed and distinguished BHEL decision relied upon by the appellant. We also note that Tribunal s decision in the case of Saurashtra Cement and Chemical Industries 1983 (12) E.L.T. 829 (T) has been confirmed by the Supreme Court as noted in 1987 (32) E.L.T. 153. Hence the issue is now well settled against the appellants. Therefore, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
