ORDER
K.C. Mamgain, Member (T)
1. The following issue was referred to the Larger Bench for consideration in view of the conflicting views expressed by different Benches of the Tribunal on the issue involved :-
“Whether hessian bags and sacking bags made out of jute fabrics and hessian and sacking fabrics on which duty of cess had been paid, would further be liable to cess under Jute Manufactures Cess Act, 1983 read with the Jute Manufactures Cess Rules, 1984.”
2. The appellants submitted written submissions and prayed for deciding the issue on merits. They submitted that they purchased Hessian cloth on which Jute Cess has already been paid at the appropriate rate and stitched the Hessian cloth on three sides to make jute bags. Cess on jute is not a Multiple Tax and, therefore, they need not pay any cess once again on the bags made by them from Hessian cloth. In the case of composite mills, where the process of manufacturing the Hessian cloth and sacks is continuous, Cess is being paid only once when the sacks are finally cleared from the factory.
3. Shri D.N. Choudhary, learned SDR appearing for the Revenue, pleaded that under Section 3(1) of Jute Manufactures Cess Act, 1983, there shall be levied and collected by way of cess for the purpose of the jute Manufactures Development Council Act, 1983, on every article of Jute Manufacture specified in Col. 2 of the Schedule and produced in India, a duty of excise at such rate not exceeding the rate specified in the corresponding entry in Col. 3 thereof as the Central Government may, by Notification in the Official Gazette, specify : The Schedule to Section 3(1) is as under :-
THE SCHEDULE
———————————————————————————-
S. No. Article of Jute Manu- The maximum rate at Actual rate at which
facture which duty of excise duty of excise is to be
may be collected collected until a differ-
ent rate is specified by
Central Govt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) (2) (3) (4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Carpet Backing Rs. 195 per tonne Rs. 65 per tonne
2. Hessian Rs. 209 -do- Rs. 69.65 -do-
3. Sacking Rs. 158 Rs. 52.65 -do-
4. Yarn and Twine Rs. 197 Rs. 65.65 -do-
5. D.W. Tarpaulin Rs. 198 Rs. 66.00 -do-
6. Decorative Fabric Rs. 457 Rs. 152.35-do-
7. Cotton Bagging Rs. 110 Rs. 36.65 -do-
8. Soil Saver Rs. 115 Rs. 38.35 -do-
9. Japanese Rice Bags Rs. 205 Rs. 68.35 -do-
10. Any other article of Rs. 184 Rs. 61.35 -do-
Jute manufacture
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He also referred to definition of ‘jute manufacture’ as given in Section 2(a) of Jute Manufactures Cess Act, 1983 which reads as under :-
“(a) “jute manufacture” means any article specified in the Schedule which contains more than fifty per cent of jute (including Bimlipatam jute or mesta fibre of any sort) by weight of the total fibre content and in the production of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power;
Explanation. – “Power” means electrical energy or any other form of energy which is mechanically transmitted and is not generated by any human or animal agency;”
4. He pleaded that from the definition of jute manufactures and from the Schedule to Section 3(1) of the Jute Manufactures Cess Act, 1983, it is clear that every article specified in this Schedule has to pay Cess when it comes into existence. Therefore, Cess on Hessian bags or Sacking bags will be leviable separately as those are covered under ‘any other article of jute manufacture’ specified at Sl. No. 10 of the Schedule. He also relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Barnagore Jute Factory Co. v. Inspector of Central Excise [1992 (57) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)], wherein it was held that, “we cannot accede to the argument that intermediate products of a scheduled industry cannot be subjected to cess on the ground that it would amount to multi-stage levy. Section 9 speaks of levy on all goods manufactured or produced in a scheduled industry. Jute yarn is goods known to market. Therefore, they are goods manufactured in a scheduled industry. The fact that such yarn is captively consumed in the manufacture of jute textiles is of no relevance”. He, therefore, pleaded that when the Act provided for charging duty (Cess) for each manufacture of jute, then question of its being charged at multiple stage has no relevance as multiple levy is inbuilt in the Act. This principle of multiple levy has been upheld by the Supreme Court in case of CCE, Meerut v. Kapri International (P) Ltd. [2002 (142) E.L.T. 10 (S.C.)], wherein it was held that multiple levy under same Tariff entry is permissible, if manufacture is involved. He also referred to Circular No. 30/89, dated 6th July, 1989 issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs, wherein they have clarified that Andhra Pradesh and Calcutta High Courts have upheld the leviability of cess on intermediate jute products consumed captively for manufacture of jute products. It has, therefore, been directed that Cess as leviable be collected on the intermediate jute products. Thus, even in composite mills, the Cess was being collected on intermediate jute products consumed captively for the manufacture of jute bags.
14. On careful consideration, we are of the view that Cess has to be collected on each product mentioned in the Schedule to Jute Manufactures Cess Act, 1983. Since there are separate entries for Hessian, Sacking and for ‘any other article of jute manufacture’, therefore, the separate Cess has to be collected on Hessian Bags and Sacking Bags, manufactured from cess paid Hessian and Sacking.
5. The reference is, therefore, answered in favour of the Revenue.
6. The appeal is sent back to the Division Bench for its final disposal.