TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he does not have own a factory in which the imported goods are to be used is very much against the Exim Policy, Board's Circular and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indica Lab P. Ltd.[ 1989 (5) TMI 72 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD] interpretation of manufacturer under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. There is nothing strange or illegal in a person utilising the manufacturing facilities of another. In order to be a manufacturer one need not own a factory. The practice of more than one manufacturer using a factory is recognised as can be seen in the SSI Notification with regard to clubbing of clearances. The expression his factory should be interpreted to mean the factory where the importer wants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (T) 1. This appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. 209/2005, dated 20-10-2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Madurai. 2. The facts of the case are as follows :- The appellants imported crude palm oil with intention to avail the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., dated 1-3-2002. Further, the appellants wanted to refine the imported crude palm oil by utilising the facility available at the refinery owned by the M/s. K.T.V. Oil Mills on job work basis. They applied to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for issue of registration certificate for availing the concessional rate of Customs duty. The lower authority rejected the application on the ground that the registration certificate under Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved to another unit without payment of duty in the context of implementing Central Excise (Removal of Goods at Concessional Rate Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2001. These instructions could be applied on the Customs side also because the Rules on the excise side are puri materia with those on the customs side. (iv) The exemption under the Notification is dependent upon the use of the imported goods and the use is with reference to the manufacture of any excisable commodity. Hence the instructions that are applicable for such manufacture in the parallel excise Rules would be equally applicable to the imported goods. Under the Excise Law and Rules, if a person does not have a factory of his own, he is permitted to send the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not been cited. (vii) The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Indica Lab P. Ltd. (supra) has held that for the purpose of the Excise Act and Rules there could be manufacturer who gets his goods manufactured on his own account from other persons meaning thereby utilising the infrastructure of others. (viii) Though it was brought to the notice of the Commissioner (Appeals) that in identical cases Registration has been given by the Chennai Commissionerate, he has ignored the same. The Chennai Commissionerate after taking the decision informed CBEC who appear to have accepted the Chennai practice. (ix) The fact that the factory at which the appellants is going to use the imported oil is already registered or not is not relevant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orities interpret that the importer should own a factory and he has to use the imported material only in his factory. Otherwise, the importer would not be entitled for the concessional assessment under the above Notification. If the importer uses the imported goods in a factory belonging to some other person he would not be entitled for the concessional assessment. The Tribunal's decision in the Panacea Bio-tech Ltd. case relied on by the Commissioner has broadly followed the above line of argument. In our view, the above approach is not at all in consonance with the philosophy of liberalisation and globalisation embraced by the Government of India in all its policies relating to Customs, Excise and Foreign Trade as revealed in a pletho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order to be a manufacturer one need not own a factory. The practice of more than one manufacturer using a factory is recognised as can be seen in the SSI Notification with regard to clubbing of clearances. The expression his factory should be interpreted to mean the factory where the importer wants to utilise the imported goods in terms of the Notification. The Department can not insist on ownership of the factory and deny registration for the purposes of the Notification. The Tribunal, in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore v. Electronic Research Ltd. cited by the ld. Advocate, has held that literal meaning of statute should be abandoned if it leads to unjustified results. In that case, goods imported under Concessional r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
