TMI Blog1993 (1) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure of the final products; (ii) packaging materials in respect of which any exemption to the extent of the duty of excise payable on the value of packaging materials is being availed of for packaging any final products; (iii) packaging materials the cost of which is not included or had not been included during the preceding financial year in the assessable value of the final products under Section 4 of the Act. (iv) cylinders for packing gases (v) plywood for the tea chests, or (vi) bags or sacks made out of fabric (whether or not coated, covered or laminated with any other material) woven from strips or tapes of plastics." 3. The scheme by which credit of Central Excise duty is available is known as the modvat scheme and the credit is known as modvat credit. 4. Analysing the meaning of inputs as provided in the explanation it would appear that everything is an input if it is (i) manufactured and used within the factory of production or (ii) used in relation to the manufacture of the final products, and (iii) paints and packaging material. The exceptions relate to items which would otherwise have come within the inclusive definition of inputs. The need to except aros ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingots and uses these items for the manufacture. The petitioner No. 1 claimed modvat credit in respect of the items. On 30th December, 1987 and 22nd March, 1988 the Assistant Collector of Central Excise held that the petitioner No. 1 was not entitled to any modvat credit in respect of the items as the items were not inputs within the meaning of Rule 57A. The petitioner No. 1 preferred two appeals. The Collector of Central Excise allowed the appeals and by two orders dated 29-8-1988 and 28-9-1988 held that the items were inputs within the meaning of Rule 57A. However, for a subsequent period the petitioner No. 1 was called upon to show cause why the modvat credit should not be disallowed in respect of the items for the periods November 1988 and February 1989 and a demand was raised for the Excise duty payable by reason of the disallowance of the credit. The petitioner replied to the show-cause notices. An order was passed by the Assistant Collector again holding that the items were not inputs as far as the manufacture of steel ingots was concerned. In holding against the petitioner No. 1, the Assistant Collector ignored the orders of the Collector dated 29-8-1988 and 28-9-1988 but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in fiscal legislation and it is the duty of the Court to determine the issue otherwise there would be scope for arbitrary assessments at the hands of different authorities. 12. Finally the Division Bench of this Court has held that where the problem is of a recurring nature the remedy under the Act was not an appropriate alternative (See : Collector of Central Excise v. Madura Coats Ltd.: 1982 (10) E.L.T. 129; Superintendent of Central Excise v. R.K. Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. -1987 (30) E.L.T. 641A. 13. For all these reasons the preliminary objection of the respondents is rejected. 14. As far as the merits of the case are concerned, there is no dispute that the items in question are inputs within the meaning of the explanation to Rule 57Abut according to the respondent authorities the items come within the excluded items. It is said that the items in question form part of the machinery because they are really used to protect the machinery and not for the manufacture of the ingot itself. 15. In the case of Satya Steel Strips (supra) the Tribunal held that the ramming mass was used to coat the bricks with which the furnace was lined in order to withstand the degree of he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are used in the Machinery or for the purpose of the Machinery. To repeat, the only relevant question is are they used in or in relation to the manufacture of ingots. It was sought to be argued that the items were 'appliances', meaning something that is applied. There is no warrant to give this strained meaning to the word. In common terms an appliance is a device. In technical terms an appliance has been defined as "a piece of equipment that draws electric or other energy and produces a desired work-saving or other result such as an Electric Heater, a Radio or an Electronic Range". (McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Tems, 3rd Edition). 20. Furthermore if there were any doubt, I hold that appliance must be read ejusdem generis with the preceding words. The words preceding constitute a specific category or a distinct genus and if there were any doubt as to the meaning of the word of appliance, which in my view there is not, the same must be construed with reference to that genus or category. The preceding words have been defined in Mc-Graw Hills dictionary as follows :- "Apparatus A compound instrument designed to carry out a specific function. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
