{"id":133841,"date":"2000-11-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-11-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000"},"modified":"2018-03-21T14:11:02","modified_gmt":"2018-03-21T08:41:02","slug":"collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000","title":{"rendered":"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk &#8230; on 7 November, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk &#8230; on 7 November, 2000<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B Kumar<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: U.C.Banerjee, Brijesh Kumar<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE ETC.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE HIMALAYAN COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCT UNION LIMITED ETC.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t07\/11\/2000\n\nBENCH:\nU.C.Banerjee, Brijesh Kumar\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>BRIJESH KUMAR, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>L&#8230;..I&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T..J<\/p>\n<p>      Since  the  above noted two appeals involve  a  common<br \/>\nquestion  for  determination, as to the interpretation of  a<br \/>\nNotification issued by the Central Government under sub-rule<br \/>\n(1)  of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944,  exempting<br \/>\ngoods  falling under Item No.68 of the First Schedule to the<br \/>\nCentral\t Excise and Salt Act 1944, on fulfilment of  certain<br \/>\nconditions, the appeals are being disposed of by this common<br \/>\njudgment.   As usual in such cases, the Revenue is trying to<br \/>\nbring  manufacturers  within its net to charge it  with\t the<br \/>\nexcise\tduty whereas the manufacturer-respondents trying  to<br \/>\nget  out  of  it  claiming   benefit  under  the   aforesaid<br \/>\nNotification.\n<\/p>\n<p>      2.   The\tbrief  facts  of   the\tcase  are  that\t the<br \/>\nmanufacturer-respondent,  Himalayan Cooperative Milk Product<br \/>\nUnion  Limited\tmanufactures butter and skimmed milk  powder<br \/>\netc.   in its industrial complex.  For purposes of  chilling<br \/>\nplant  of Dairy Unit, the respondent seems to have installed<br \/>\na   plant   manufacturing  liquid   nitrogen   which   item,<br \/>\nundisputedly  falls under Item 68 of the Excise Tariff.\t  By<br \/>\nmeans  of Notification No.  105\/80-C.E.\t dated 19.6.1980 the<br \/>\nexcise\tduty  payable on goods falling under Item No.68,  is<br \/>\nexempted  in  respect  of the first clearances of  the\tsaid<br \/>\ngoods for home consumption by or on behalf of a manufacturer<br \/>\nfrom  one  or  more factories up to a  value  not  exceeding<br \/>\nrupees\tthirty\tlakhs inter alia on the condition  that\t the<br \/>\ntotal  of the value of the capital investment made from time<br \/>\nto  time, on the machinery installed for manufacturing\tsaid<br \/>\ngoods  is not more than rupees ten lakhs.  According to\t the<br \/>\nmanufacturer-respondents the total capital investment in the<br \/>\nplant  and  machinery manufacturing liquid nitrogen is\tless<br \/>\nthan  rupees  ten lakhs, therefore the benefit of  exemption<br \/>\nfrom  excise  duty is admissible under the  Notification  in<br \/>\nquestion  dated\t 19.6.1980.   3.  The  Assistant  Collector,<br \/>\nCentral\t Excise,  Siliguri Division by order dated  5.9.1983<br \/>\nrejected  the  claim  of the respondents and  confirmed\t the<br \/>\ndemand\tas  raised by the Superintendent of  Central  Excise<br \/>\nunder  Central Excise Rules, observing that the\t respondents<br \/>\nare  using  all\t the plants and machinery  for\tpurposes  of<br \/>\nmanufacturing all kinds\/varieties of excisable goods falling<br \/>\nunder  different  Tariff items, the total value\t of  capital<br \/>\ninvestment  of all plants and machineries, installed in\t the<br \/>\nsaid  factory are to be taken into account and no  exemption<br \/>\non  investment which was more than ten lakhs was admissible.<br \/>\nThus  according to the excise authorities the total value of<br \/>\ninvestments  in\t all  the plants  manufacturing\t butter\t and<br \/>\nskimmed\t milk powder and other dairy products as well as for<br \/>\nmanufacturing  of  liquid  nitrogen  was to  be\t taken\tinto<br \/>\naccount.  According to the respondents Himalayan Cooperative<br \/>\nMilk Product Union Limited the value of investment on liquid<br \/>\nnitrogen  plant\t which alone is relevant is much  less\tthan<br \/>\nrupees ten lakhs.  The appeal preferred against the order of<br \/>\nAssistant  Collector  was  also dismissed by  the  Collector<br \/>\n(Appeals), Central Excise, Calcutta by order dated 9.1.1984.<br \/>\nBoth  the  authorities\thave,\thowever,  held\tthat  liquid<br \/>\nnitrogen itself is a finished product and falls under Tariff<br \/>\nItem 68.  4.  The respondents preferred an appeal before the<br \/>\nCustoms,  Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal,\t New<br \/>\nDelhi.\t The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated 21.1.1988<br \/>\nallowed\t the  appeal holding that the respondents  would  be<br \/>\nentitled   for\tthe  benefit   under  the  Notification\t  of<br \/>\nexemption.  On facts though the Tribunal remanded the matter<br \/>\nto  the\t original adjudicating authority for  computing\t the<br \/>\ncapital\t investment  on\t plant and  machinery  referable  to<br \/>\nliquid\tnitrogen  and the common plant and machinery in\t the<br \/>\nsame  industrial  complex  so as to  ascertain\tthe  capital<br \/>\ninvestment on generator used for the chilling water.  5.  We<br \/>\nfeel  it  would be better to peruse the\t Notification  dated<br \/>\n19.6.1980  exempting  the  payment of excise duty  on  goods<br \/>\nfalling\t under Item 68 of the Tariff.  It reads as  follows:<br \/>\nIn exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule of rule (1)<br \/>\nof  rule  8  of\t the  Central Excise  Rules,  1944,  and  in<br \/>\nsupersession  of the notification of the Govt.\tof India  in<br \/>\nthe   Ministry\t of   Finance\t (Department   of   Revenue)<br \/>\nNo.89\/79-Central  Excises,  dated  the 1st March  1979,\t the<br \/>\nCentral\t Government hereby exempts goods, falling under Item<br \/>\nNo.68  of the First Schedule to the Central Excise and\tSalt<br \/>\nAct  1944 (1 of 1944), (hereinafter referred to as the\tsaid<br \/>\ngoods), in respect of the first clearances of the said goods<br \/>\nfor  home consumption by or on behalf of a manufacturer from<br \/>\none  or\t more  factories upto a value not  exceeding  rupees<br \/>\nthirty\tlakhs,\tcleared on or after the 1st day of April  in<br \/>\nany  financial\tyear, from the whole of the duty  of  excise<br \/>\nleviable thereon:\n<\/p>\n<p>      Provided that during the period commencing on the 19th<br \/>\nday  of June 1980 and ending on the 31st day of March, 1981,<br \/>\nthe  value of the clearances of the said goods eligible\t for<br \/>\nexemption  under  this notification shall be subject to\t the<br \/>\nfollowing conditions, namely:-\n<\/p>\n<p>      (i)  The aggregate of the value of clearances eligible<br \/>\nfor  exemption\tcontained  in this notification\t during\t the<br \/>\naforesaid  period,  and\t the  clearances,  if  any,  already<br \/>\neffected  by or on behalf of a manufacturer in terms of\t the<br \/>\nexemption  contained in the notification No.   89\/79-Central<br \/>\nExcises,  dated\t the  1st March 1979 aforesaid,\t during\t the<br \/>\nperiod\tcommencing  on the 1st day of April 1980, shall\t not<br \/>\nexceed rupees thirty lakhs;  and<\/p>\n<p>      (ii)  The\t value of clearances eligible for  exemption<br \/>\ncontained  in this notification during the aforesaid  period<br \/>\ncommencing  on the 19th day of June, 1980 and ending on\t the<br \/>\n31st  day  of March, 1981 shall, in no case,  exceed  rupees<br \/>\ntwenty four lakhs.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Provided further than an officer not below the rank of<br \/>\nan  Assistant Collector of Central Excise is satisfied\tthat<br \/>\nthe  sum  total of the value of the capital investment\tmade<br \/>\nfrom  time  to time on plant and machinery installed in\t the<br \/>\nindustrial  unit  in which the said goods, under  clearance,<br \/>\nare  manufactured,  is\tnot  more  than\t rupees\t ten  lakhs.<br \/>\n(Underlines by us for emphasis)<\/p>\n<p>      2.  Where a factory producing the said goods is run at<br \/>\ndifferent  times  during  a   financial\t year  by  different<br \/>\nmanufacturers, the total value of the clearances of the said<br \/>\ngoods  from  such factory eligible for exemption under\tthis<br \/>\nnotification  in  such year shall not exceed  rupees  thirty<br \/>\nlakhs.\n<\/p>\n<p>      3.  Nothing contained in this notification shall apply<br \/>\nto  a  manufacturer,  if the total value of the\t said  goods<br \/>\ncleared,  if  any,  for home consumption by him\t or  on\t his<br \/>\nbehalf from one or more factories in the preceding financial<br \/>\nyear exceeded rupees thirty lakhs.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Explanation 1  While determining the sum total of the<br \/>\nvalue  of the capital investment, only the face value of the<br \/>\ninvestment  at the time when such investment was made  shall<br \/>\nbe  taken into account, but the value of the investment made<br \/>\non  plant and machinery which have been removed\t permanently<br \/>\nfrom the industrial unit or rendered unfit for any use shall<br \/>\nbe excluded from such determination.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Explanation   II.\t    In\t this\tnotification,\tthe<br \/>\nexpression  factory  has  the meaning assigned\tto  it\tin<br \/>\nclause\t(m)  of section 2 of the Factories Act, 1948 (63  of<br \/>\n1948).\n<\/p>\n<p>      Explanation  III.\t  For the purpose of computing\tthe<br \/>\nvalue  of clearances under this notification, the clearances<br \/>\nof  the said goods which are exempted from the whole of\t the<br \/>\nduty  of  excise leviable thereon by any other\tnotification<br \/>\nissued\tunder  sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the Central  Excise<br \/>\nRules,\t1944, and for the time being in force, shall not  be<br \/>\ntaken into account.\n<\/p>\n<p>      A\t bare perusal of the Notification quoted above shows<br \/>\nthat  the  Central Government under Rule 8(1) of the  Excise<br \/>\nRules  exempts goods in respect of first clearance for\thome<br \/>\nconsumption  by or on behalf of the manufacturer from one or<br \/>\nmore  factories\t upto  a value not exceeding  rupees  thirty<br \/>\nlakhs.\t  The  exemption  would\t  however  be  allowable  on<br \/>\nfulfilment  of\ta condition as contained in the\t proviso  to<br \/>\nclause\t(ii) of the Notification which says that an  officer<br \/>\nnot  below  the\t rank of an Assistant Collector\t of  Central<br \/>\nExcise is to be satisfied that the sum total of the value of<br \/>\nthe  capital  investment  made on the  plant  and  machinery<br \/>\ninstalled  in the industrial unit manufacturing said  goods<br \/>\nunder  clearance  is  not more than rupees ten\tlakhs.\t On<br \/>\nperusal\t of  the  proviso under consideration, it  would  be<br \/>\nclear  that  it\t does  not refer to any\t other\tgoods  under<br \/>\nclearance  except  the\tgoods falling under Item 68  of\t the<br \/>\nFirst Schedule to the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944.  In<br \/>\nthe  beginning\titself the Notification says that the  goods<br \/>\nfalling\t under\tItem  68  are  to be  referred\tto,  in\t the<br \/>\nNotification, as `said goods.  According to own findings of<br \/>\nthe  Assistant\tCollector,  liquid   nitrogen  is  itself  a<br \/>\nfinished product and falls under Tariff Item No.68.  In that<br \/>\nview  of the matter the question of taking into account\t the<br \/>\nvalue of the capital investment made on plants and machinery<br \/>\nmanufacturing goods other than covered under Item No.68 does<br \/>\nnot  arise.   We  find no force in the submissions  made  on<br \/>\nbehalf\tof  the\t appellants  that value of  all\t plants\t and<br \/>\nmachinery  manufacturing butter and skimmed milk powder etc.<br \/>\nhas  also  to  be added up so as to find out as\t to  whether<br \/>\ntotal  value  of  the capital investment in  the  plant\t and<br \/>\nmachinery  is  rupees  ten lakhs or more.  In our  view\t the<br \/>\nvalue  of the capital investment has to be in respect of the<br \/>\nplant  and  machinery  manufacturing the said  goods  viz.<br \/>\ngoods  covered under Item No.68 of the Tariff, clearances of<br \/>\nwhich  alone is taken into account in exempting from payment<br \/>\nof excise duty under the Notification in question.  The said<br \/>\ngoods in the present case is only liquid nitrogen.  Thus the<br \/>\nvalue\tof   investment\t  in   the  plants   and   machinery<br \/>\nmanufacturing  other goods not covered under Item 68 has  no<br \/>\nrelevance  nor\tit  is to be taken into\t account.   6.\t The<br \/>\nTribunal  while\t allowing the appeal followed a decision  of<br \/>\nBombay\tHigh  Court reported in 1984 (16) E.L.T.  30  (Bom.)<br \/>\nDevidayal Electronics &amp; Wires Ltd.  and another versus Union<br \/>\nof  India and another.\tThe similar notification in  respect<br \/>\nof an earlier year was under consideration before the Court.<br \/>\nIt  had\t been noticed that two words have been used  in\t the<br \/>\nNotification  namely,  the `factory and `industrial  unit.<br \/>\nThe  two expressions would be presumed to have been used for<br \/>\ndifferent  meaning.  It was held that industrial unit  would<br \/>\nmean  something\t other\tthan the factory, which would  be  a<br \/>\nseparate isolate part of the plant which is exclusively used<br \/>\nfor  manufacture  of goods for which exemption\tis  claimed.<br \/>\nLearned\t counsel for the appellants tried to distinguish the<br \/>\ncase on facts.\tWe, however, find that in principle what has<br \/>\nbeen  held in Devidayal (supra) as followed by the Tribunal,<br \/>\ncannot\tbe  said  to  be an  incorrect\tview.\tThe  factual<br \/>\ndeviation  would  be  a matter on facts of each\t case.\t The<br \/>\nother case which the Tribunal has referred to is reported in<br \/>\n1987  (27)  E.L.T.   273 (A.P.) Golden Press  versus  Deputy<br \/>\nCollector of Central Excise, Hyderabad and Another.  In this<br \/>\ncase  a notice was issued on the manufacturer of cartons  as<br \/>\nto  why penalty be not imposed since the goods\tmanufactured<br \/>\nwere  removed without payment of duty.\tIt was pleaded\tthat<br \/>\ncartons\t were  exempted under a notification  exempting\t all<br \/>\nproducts  of  printing industry.  The Court,  however,\theld<br \/>\nthat  cartons  though may be printed, cannot be held  to  be<br \/>\nproduct\t of  printing industry.\t They will be  relatable  to<br \/>\npackaging industry.  Hence, the benefit, as pleaded, was not<br \/>\nadmissible.   In so far as the other arguments raised  about<br \/>\nthe  value of the investment made for manufacture of printed<br \/>\ncartons,  it  was  held that cost of cutting  machines\tetc.<br \/>\ncould  not  be excluded which according to the\tmanufacturer<br \/>\nwas  not  used for printed cartons.  The argument  that\t the<br \/>\nvalue  of  the\tinvestment  in\t the  plant  and   machinery<br \/>\nmanufacturing  a  particular  item under a  separate  tariff<br \/>\nwould  alone  be taken into consideration was not  accepted.<br \/>\nThe  language  of the exemption notification as involved  in<br \/>\nthat  case  was\t quoted which was to the effect:   The\tsum<br \/>\ntotal  of the value of the capital investment made from time<br \/>\nto  time on plant and machinery installed in the  industrial<br \/>\nunit in which the goods under clearance are manufactured, is<br \/>\nnot  more than rupees ten lakhs. (As quoted in Para 22\t(b)<br \/>\nof the judgment).\n<\/p>\n<p>      It  is  then  observed  that  according  to  the\tsaid<br \/>\nnotification  total  value  of the entire machinery  in\t the<br \/>\nindustrial unit should be taken into account as there was no<br \/>\noccasion  for allocating the machinery between various goods<br \/>\nmanufactured  therein  and  by\tway of an  example,  it\t was<br \/>\nobserved  that\tit may create complications where a  factory<br \/>\nmanufacturing  goods falling under more than one tariff item<br \/>\nbut  has only one generator of power plant, so in such cases<br \/>\nin  what manner generator or power plant was to be allocated<br \/>\nbetween two items.  The plea raised was negatived and it was<br \/>\nheld  that  total  value  of the  entire  machinery  in\t the<br \/>\nindustrial  unit  should  be taken into\t account.   At\tthis<br \/>\nstage,\tit would be appropriate to point out the  difference<br \/>\nin  the language used in two notifications.  We find that in<br \/>\nthe   Notification  dated  19.6.1980,\twith  which  we\t are<br \/>\npresently  concerned,  the  proviso to clause  (ii)  of\t the<br \/>\nNotification  says  the capital investment made from  time<br \/>\nto  time on plant and machinery installed in the  industrial<br \/>\nunit   in  which  the  said   goods  under   clearance\t are<br \/>\nmanufactured..\tThe expression said goods is not used in<br \/>\nthe  Notification  interpreted in the case of  Golden  Press<br \/>\n(supra).  The said goods signifies or identifies the goods<br \/>\nwhich  are  covered  under  Item  68  in  respect  of  which<br \/>\nexemption has been granted.  But the word said is not used<br \/>\nin  the\t Notification  under consideration in  the  case  of<br \/>\nGolden\tPress (supra) as indicated above says industrial<br \/>\nunit\tin   which   the     goods   under   clearance\t are<br \/>\nmanufactured.\tThe  goods  have not been  specified  by<br \/>\nusing  the  expression\tsaid goods.  In\t the  Notification<br \/>\ndated  19.6.1980,  as already indicated earlier,  the  goods<br \/>\nfalling\t under\tItem 68 are to be referred as said  goods.<br \/>\nTherefore,  in our view it will not be possible to take into<br \/>\nconsideration  the value of investment of all the plants and<br \/>\nmachinery  manufacturing  different items viz.\tgoods  other<br \/>\nthan the said goods.\n<\/p>\n<p>      7.   In  our view the Tribunal rightly  preferred\t the<br \/>\nview  taken  in the case of Devidayal (supra).\tThe  factual<br \/>\nhurdles\t like a common generator may be in use by  different<br \/>\nunits  in  the factory complex as indicated in the  case  of<br \/>\nGolden\tPress  (supra)\tcan well be worked out\tby  devising<br \/>\nproper\tmethod\twhile  apportioning the value  of  different<br \/>\nplants\tproportionately.   In no way such hurdle, as  posed,<br \/>\nwould change the meaning of a Notification which on the face<br \/>\nof it and by the plain language used therein has unambiguous<br \/>\nand   clear  meaning.\t8.    Such  Notifications  by  which<br \/>\nexemption  or other benefits are provided by the  Government<br \/>\nin  exercise  of  its statutory power,\tnormally  have\tsome<br \/>\npurpose\t and  policy decision behind it.  Such benefits\t are<br \/>\nmeant  to  be provided to the investors\t and  manufacturers.<br \/>\nTherefore,  such purpose is not to be defeated nor those who<br \/>\nmay  be\t entitled for it are to be deprived by\tinterpreting<br \/>\nthe  notification which may give it some meaning other\tthan<br \/>\nwhat  is  clearly and plainly flowing from it.\t9.   9.\t  In<br \/>\nview  of the discussion held above, we find no merit in\t the<br \/>\nappeals\t and  they  are hereby dismissed.  No  order  as  to<br \/>\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk &#8230; on 7 November, 2000 Author: B Kumar Bench: U.C.Banerjee, Brijesh Kumar PETITIONER: COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE ETC. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE HIMALAYAN COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCT UNION LIMITED ETC. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07\/11\/2000 BENCH: U.C.Banerjee, Brijesh Kumar JUDGMENT: BRIJESH KUMAR, J. L&#8230;..I&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T&#8230;&#8230;.T..J [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-133841","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk ... on 7 November, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk ... on 7 November, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2000-11-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-21T08:41:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk &#8230; on 7 November, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-11-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-21T08:41:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000\"},\"wordCount\":2559,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000\",\"name\":\"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk ... on 7 November, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-11-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-21T08:41:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk &#8230; on 7 November, 2000\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk ... on 7 November, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk ... on 7 November, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-11-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-21T08:41:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk &#8230; on 7 November, 2000","datePublished":"2000-11-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-21T08:41:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000"},"wordCount":2559,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000","name":"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk ... on 7 November, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-11-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-21T08:41:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-central-excise-etc-vs-the-himalayan-cooperative-milk-on-7-november-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Collector Of Central Excise Etc vs The Himalayan Cooperative Milk &#8230; on 7 November, 2000"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133841","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=133841"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133841\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=133841"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=133841"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=133841"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}