AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Neutral Citations
2002 INSC 375
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Section to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986)
  • Section/Subsection of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Act
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Neutral Citations
2002 INSC 375
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • Section to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986)
  • Section/Subsection of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Act
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

These consolidated appeals arise from two orders of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) dated 1-4-1991 and 19-7-1991. The respondent manufactures sanitaryware and uses plaster of Paris to create moulds that are subsequently employed in shaping the final ceramic products. Claiming that the plaster of Paris qualified for captive-consumption exemption under Notification No. 217/86-CE (as amended by Notification No. 82/87-CE), the respondent sought relief from excise duty. The Excise authorities denied the exemption, but CEGAT reversed that decision. The Revenue’s present appeals challenge CEGAT’s rulings.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether plaster of Paris moulds used within the factory are “inputs” entitled to exemption under Notification No. 217/86-CE (as amended) or constitute a distinct final product outside the notification’s scope.
  2. Whether the proviso to the notification—which withholds exemption when the final product is itself fully exempt from duty—bars the respondent’s claim.

Arguments of the Parties

Revenue's Arguments

  • Plaster of Paris moulds are excisable goods under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and should be treated as final products rather than inputs.
  • Because these moulds are exempt from duty, the proviso to Notification No. 217/86-CE precludes the respondent from claiming exemption on the plaster of Paris used to make them.

Respondent's Arguments

The opinion does not set out the respondent’s submissions in detail.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court examined Notification No. 217/86-CE and its amendment, Notification No. 82/87-CE. The amended table expressly lists goods under Chapter 25 (“plaster of Paris”) as inputs and goods under Chapter 69 (“ceramic goods,” including sanitaryware) as final products. Sanitaryware is not exempt from duty, so the notification’s proviso does not apply.

Rejecting the Revenue’s argument, the Court held that the moulds are merely tools used “in or in relation to” the manufacture of sanitaryware and therefore fall within the definition of “inputs” for the purposes of the exemption. The Court also referred to Notification No. 221/86-CE (as amended by Notification No. 89/89-CE), which specifically recognises “plaster of Paris moulds” as inputs for ceramic products, reinforcing its interpretation.

Having found no error in CEGAT’s application of the notifications, the Court upheld the tribunal’s orders.

Holding and Implications

Appeals dismissed. The CEGAT orders granting the exemption to the respondent stand affirmed. No order as to costs.

Implications: The decision clarifies that plaster of Paris moulds consumed within the factory to manufacture sanitaryware qualify for exemption under Notification No. 217/86-CE. The ruling provides administrative guidance for similar captive-consumption claims involving intermediate goods in ceramic manufacturing.

To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Collector Of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Hindustan Sanitaryware & Industries .

    Order

    1. These two appeals arise from the judgments of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal in Order No. 304 of 1991-C in E/Appeal No. 3841 of 1990-C dated 1-4-1991 and in Order No. 600 of 1991-C in E/Appeal No. 2031 of 1991-C dated 19-7-1991. The judgment in Order No. 304 of 1991-C in E/Appeal No. 3841 of 1990-C dated 1-4-1991 is followed in Order No. 600 of 1991-C in E/Appeal No. 2031 of 1991-C dated 19-7-1991.

    2. The respondent, a manufacturer of sanitaryware, uses plaster of Paris as inputs for the final product of sanitaryware. The process involves making of moulds from plaster of Paris which are in turn used as inputs for manufacture of sanitaryware. The respondent claimed the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 217/86 (as amended by Notification No. 82/87-CE.)

    3. In these cases, though the Excise Authorities declined to grant the benefit of exemption, the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal set aside their orders and held that the exemption would apply to the respondent.

    4. Mr R.P Bhatt, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Revenue contends that as the moulds of plaster of Paris are goods classified under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 they cannot be treated as inputs; they must be treated as the final product and as they are exempted, the respondent is not entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 217/86.

    5. We are afraid, we cannot accept the contention of the learned Senior Counsel.

    6. The said notification reads as follows:

    “Specified Goods Used Within the Factory of Production in the Manufacture of Finished Goods

    In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts goods specified in column (2) of the table hereto annexed (hereinafter referred to as ‘inputs’) manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production, in or in relation to the manufacture of final products specified in column (3) of the said table, from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon, which is specified in the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986):
    Provided that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products which are exempt from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon or is chargeable to nil rate of duty.
    Explanation.—For the purposes of this notification, ‘inputs’ does not include—
    (i) to (iv)***
    Sl. No. Description of inputs Description of final products (1) (2) (3) 1. Goods classifiable under any headings of Chapters 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 48, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 or 96 (other than those falling under Heading 36.03 or 37.05) of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986). Goods classifiable under any headings of Chapters 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 or 96 (other than those falling under Heading 36.03 or 37.05) of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986).”

    7. The notification, extracted above, was amended by Notification No. 82/87-CE which is as under:

    “Exemption to captive consumption of MODVAT items.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 217/86-Central Excise, dated 2-4-1986, namely:
    In the said notification for the table, the following table shall be substituted, namely:
    Sl. No. Description of inputs Description of final products (1) (2) (3) 1. Goods classifiable under any headings of Chapters … 25 … (other than those falling under Heading 36.05 or 37.06) of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986). Goods classifiable under any headings of Chapters … 69 … (other than those falling under Heading 36.05 or 37.06) of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986).”

    8. A perusal of the notification as amended by Notification No. 82/87, extracted above, shows that the description of inputs given in column 2 under Chapter 25, would be “plaster of Paris” and the final product given in column 3 under Chapter 69 would be “ceramic goods”.

    9. The proviso postulates a situation where the final product itself is exempted in which case alone the exemption of plaster of Paris under Notification No. 217/86 cannot be availed of. It is nobody's case that the sanitaryware falling under Chapter 69 has been exempted by the Central Government. What is exempted is plastic moulds but they are only inputs and not final product in this case. This fact is further clarified by the Central Government in Notification No. 221/86, as amended by Notification No. 89/89. Item 6 thereof clearly mentions that plaster of Paris moulds are inputs for ceramic products.

    10. From the above discussion, it follows that plaster of Paris which is used as inputs in relation to the manufacture of sanitaryware (final product), is exempt under Notification No. 217/86 dated 2-4-1986, as amended.

    11. In this view of the matter, we do not find any illegality in the orders under challenge.

    12. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed, but in the circumstances of these cases, there shall be no order as to costs.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Collector Of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Hindustan Sanitaryware & Industries .
    (Sep 10, 2002)