{"id":238417,"date":"2010-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010"},"modified":"2014-06-06T23:37:31","modified_gmt":"2014-06-06T18:07:31","slug":"the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & … on 1 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & … on 1 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: N.Kumar And H.S.Kempanna<\/div>\n
 \n\n \n\n \n\nIN THE HIGH COURT 01+\" KARNATAKA AT BgT:~:.Q;\u00a7.ig;j:;_\ufb01: \n\nDATED THIS THE .1 8'? DAY OF sEp'rEMf3\ufb01;.R.,  J'\n\nPRESENT _ _\nTHE HOITBLE MR.VJUS'fICE*.V_i\\I.KIfi\\riA'R '  '\n\n~~ \n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTIC \u00a7E H;S__.KEMPAN'NA\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nTHE COMMISSTONIEDR'. oi?j.cAE1\\1TTeTAL[2:xc1sE,\n\n7TH FLOOR \"TRADE CEN R\u00a3:;.   '\n\nBUNTS HQsTE.[,\"'Rc:g9g3,  \"  \" \n\nMANGAVLQRE-T.__93 1-3' '  _  APPELLANT\n\n \"  [BYV -- ADV.)\n\nAND:\n\n , M \/s MiANGALoR9iER1Es &\n\nPE'rR0cHt::MicALs LTD,\n\n \"_VII.LAGE--vB\u00a7ALA_. VIA KATIPALLA,\n\n .jE;XcJ:rsE ACT, \u00a3944 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED\n\nHO; z3;.:J'r:ii'5TH OUR';\nMANGALOREQ-\u00a75174 149. ...RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
  {BS} SRLRAJESH. CHANDER KUMAR &
\n_ ” MS._YOViNI RAJESH — Anvs. FOR
\n“M\/s CHANDER KUMAR & ASSOCIATES]<\/p>\n
“”._Vv””‘I’}:IIS CEA IS FILED U\/S. 35G(2} OF TI-IE CENTRAL<\/p>\n
E
\nif ‘<\/p>\n
 xw ,9\/Aw\/\u00bbwaW.y\u00bb\u00a2.\u00bb,mM\ufb01,W.N,.  .\n<\/p>\n
05.04.2006 PASSED IN FINAL ORDER NO.74e es: 7_I~IIV:?1j\/-200$; IN
\nEAPPEAL N085\/03 81 531. \/04. PRAYING   ‘I’}j1IS
\nHONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASIEZD TO I) ‘l’O:__Di\u00a7;’C1’1DE’~T}-{E<\/p>\n
QUESTION OF LAW AS MENTIONED THEREIN<,.__II)v SET ASI1:)I\u00ab:.__
\nTHE ORDER PASSED BY THE cI::STg\u00a7T IN E'.A'PP1\u00a7;AL'*NOA.85\/O8,
\n& 531\/04 VIBE ITS FINAL ORDEZR N0;?=\u00e9L\u20acI S; \u00ab7_47;_'06'*-DA'1"ED T
\n05.04.2006. WHICH IS ANNEXED, AS-~AAI\\.?NEXUFEE-P-. f*I_fO=a{1'1~iE <\/p>\n
APPEAL. V 1__<\/p>\n
THIS CEA COMING O;*~II0:"'I#_OI2 "AD.MISS'-IO'N;V'"THI'S DAY.'
\nN.KU'MAR _ J. DELIVERED TIAIE:S'I:OI-I{OwII\\:r;; " I<\/p>\n
J I'; .D"G__1'\u00a7!;E  <\/p>\n
This appezdr i.S  VF{-Qy'.6'i';i\u00a7.3 e .e'rI';\ufb011enging the Order<\/p>\n
passed by 4.t1\u00a7*a.Ve  Tax Appellate<\/p>\n
TribLInIa;1"'{\u00a3'0r:"ShOrt:.; hei*eIrI:iI"ter""referred to as CESTAT] hoiding
\nthat   nOt excisable and therefore, there<\/p>\n
is no 1i.abViV'1iiyA U) pay t':1A'I:j,r,. .."'
\n '  Tfie  V aSSf;SSeewM'\/S.Manga1Ore Refinery and<\/p>\n
 PeI,'rOCf1eI;1_i'(i21\ufb011S Ltd. IS a hoider Of Cemral Excise RegiSi.r3.ti0I1<\/p>\n
 .Ce';_'i.iI'i(:vziI;\u00a2?,;_  is engaged in The II1a~1I1ufac:1ure of various<\/p>\n
 : x{L_Si'"IS}..fed1i11g; Lmder heaciing 27 01' the Schechlle to the Centrai.<\/p>\n
p\u20ac' EI_'O1\u20acV..\u00a7'1I'11.VA.:f)I'0dL1C1.S irlcluding Lower Sulphur Heavy Stock<\/p>\n
Excise Ta1"ilT Act. 1985 {for short I%1e1'ei11a1ft.e1" 1'efe1'1je_d– u"'tAhe<\/p>\n
ACE'). The LSHS was Captively COI1Su1'11\u20acd for the.gc%1'1ef\u00e9iii'O15_'s_'Oi:'.<\/p>\n
steam. The steam so genera"aed \\vas'i'1"t.iiiSed',4i'01j.ger1e.i*at.ie;1 '<\/p>\n
of electricity. The assessee \ufb02ied c1aAi;:–".Vsii"-ic\u00e9ztiolld'deelvaraiidia,<\/p>\n
Claiming exemption from payn1e'fIt_M0f du1_,_y'x..md:ei*'~,fioti\ufb01catior\ufb01'<\/p>\n
No.67\/95 CX dated 16_.,3.1.99V5—–"ea;pLi\\}c\u00ab"C0I1S1in1ption of<\/p>\n
3. Inteiligence g\u00a7fd1e1’ed  the”dV_efp2V;rtn1ent: indicated<\/p>\n
that the e1ec;’Erici;1;_\\:,}’ sd ggenerateid –:.”wa_$_\u00a7being diverted for<\/p>\n
pu1’p0se__s -_oLheV.rdd.’L’ha11\u00bbj’i;he’~~..use in 01′ in reiation to the
\nmanufacture of V”‘pef’;OieV{i’1n’ products i.e. for corlstruction.<\/p>\n
purpxjse ‘.vithi11″‘Lh_eV vfactlory p1’em1ses. lighting MRPL residentiai<\/p>\n
dvicolgfly gi\ufb01fgt  to M\/s\ufb01industan G-as Industries Ltd. [HGIL}.<\/p>\n
‘I1,’ V.-V7.’_clSx fdhai the exemption under the No1iI’icaLion supra<\/p>\n
was”‘~._110\u00a7”admissible L0 LSHS capt,1’.ve}y rI1anufactu1’ed for<\/p>\n
\u00ab VV”gex1eraxt1ng:{ such electricity for other purposes. Such use of<\/p>\n
‘LSHSWX-‘\u00a31S not declalwed in Lheil” C1E1SSi\ufb01{_’.El1,iOI’l declaratiolls and<\/p>\n
d  V. .,Vi1′.E1’es\u00a311’1ed in c(mt.1*a1vemci()11 of the p1’0visi0r1s 0fRu1e I 7’3}{3(2)[b}.<\/p>\n
Z,<\/p>\n
6.5 <\/p>\n
,Aceordi1’1g1y. a Show cause notice was issued de111:;:I1d:”ing”-g:1L1fey<\/p>\n
of Rs.33.1.2,928\/- on the p1’opo1″:’ior1a1′,e c;L1a1ntit_.y;V–.ofiLSIfi$ <\/p>\n
in the generation of eleetric\ufb02y. whi_C.1r1_ir1 u;r’::”w.:;.es.not.,’usea ‘in. 1 <\/p>\n
or In relatlon to the manufacture ‘of 1-‘i111a1–e’pI”0.dtzo:ts ‘C’i’.:i’fi’1’1V’:.\u00a5;.7″,,”[hE?<\/p>\n
period from April. 1996 to scipmnbef;-,_1’\u00e93a?. i{r’oA;jo.sajVV\\;_easVha}_sVo
\nmade to impose penalty under S4L\u00bbe’c_\u00a3ior}. 11 AC t.he}Ae1; and the<\/p>\n
Rules and also to dema~:1 ofint’ere:\u00a71i.L’n’\/.s;.,1.LAB of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
4. The Commissi-onerjof?CenTt1ia:}.VExcise Bangalore III<\/p>\n
vide in Origina?:,.:oVrderlA_No.93″e1a1;Ved \u00abVVS\/I-V3.10.1998 Confirmed<\/p>\n
the d:\u00a7:rnane1’V’TojfV  ‘a}s’*’.Vproposed in the three show–cause
\nnoti(:es.”\u00a3j_{e _a1So._ ‘d’en1af1s:_1’ed’interest. and imposed penalty of<\/p>\n
33,].2.;928,\/-.V. V-.Ag’gfie\\feri by the sa_.ir_1 orde.,1i. the El.FSS6’tSSEtP.<\/p>\n
 aVpp\u00e9a1;:\u00bb\u00a7’e. tb..\u00abeEoA*f.”‘The Tribunal by its final order No.423 to<\/p>\n
  remanded the matter for denova<\/p>\n
adjndieatiorjg(TA\ufb02.er Such remand while adjudicating, the denova<\/p>\n
 order”.  from three Show Cause notices which was subject<\/p>\n
 rna\ufb01er earlier, three more Show Cause notices for subsequent<\/p>\n
period were also taken up for consideration. The<\/p>\n
1.;\n<\/p>\n
.: L4,, *<\/p>\n
Commissioner of Central Excise. Mangalore. vidc’:l’Cr_der’..A’i11<\/p>\n
Original No.4\/O3 dated 26.2.2004 c0ni’i1’rning  <\/p>\n
duty. imposed penalty under Rule,l~73_Q 00<\/p>\n
Section 11 AC of the Act. interest :L=n-1die14A~Seeltior1  <\/p>\n
Act was also demanded. Aggrieyed by the saidfurders, then’<\/p>\n
assessee preferred an appeal to___C’ESA.T. in ~a_sirnilar case in<\/p>\n
respect of the order in ‘origilnal  dated 27.4.2001<\/p>\n
duty of and penalty of<\/p>\n
Rs.5,00,000   lend. .a’s:\u00a7’essee by the Assessing
\nAuthority a,gglar.ins;\u20acl@y’l1ie’l1’  iiled an appeal. before the
\nCornniissioner ‘ -The appeal was dismissed
\nupholding dema’nd.– l:”=.Tl4’l1lereI’ore, the assessee preferred<\/p>\n
appeal 1″.u. the CESTZXT bu-3111 against the appellate order as well<\/p>\n
as .the 01’igin_21l.~Qrder.\n<\/p>\n
 Tlie ls. ecific case leaded b the assessee was,<\/p>\n
LSPESV n1aniifa_c’i’ured in their refinery was captively consumed<\/p>\n
Was fuel.’~in”;the refinery operations and also used in steaming<\/p>\n
‘*.()pe1’a’t\u00abi()11s. The steam so developed was used (taptively in the<\/p>\n
la<\/p>\n
manL1i”act,u1’e of elect.ricit,y within the refinery and” thactx no<\/p>\n
portion of the LSHS has been moved outside the <\/p>\n
specific stand was LSHS was only an in’terme.ddiaf,e_jjroldu’ct”~<\/p>\n
intended only for captive consumpt_i,.o.n._t”or use Vdas.dff=.iel.i1iV the<\/p>\n
refinery operations and the Captive’ Powet’ <\/p>\n
was only a residue omainedyaiwhile l13Aro’eessi11;_\u00a7ilow .Su3lp.hi.1r\ufb01<\/p>\n
Crude oil which was burnt in the’-vrefiiiery bo.ilerS_.’aI1Ci.bheaters in<\/p>\n
order to meet e11vironme11t;al i-stipulat-foils imposed by the<\/p>\n
Central and State Governrne1its;\u00a7–.dtiliatdthde zinternal fuel oil
\n{LSHS) did not meet the rigid.spe_cifications’tvfor LSHS specified<\/p>\n
by 181. :7.,_Th-eiefore.’:’i-the was merely an internal fuel oil
\nused for co’nsuInpt’ion neither marketed nor marketable.<\/p>\n
it was.\u00a7n’oi.aa11 ext:is_aE)le product and therefore. no duty could be<\/p>\n
   onthe_”:ii11_pug11ed quantity of LSHS.<\/p>\n
_ G.VV”\u00ab,_rS4\u00e9CQiiflly, they contended in the alternative that<\/p>\n
the’  did not go into the questiorl. whether the<\/p>\n
xglisptited goods is excisable or not. The lower authorities<\/p>\n
fr’ejVec:t.ed the said contention of the assesses: and held the<\/p>\n
iii<\/p>\n
ggwi\/__..\n<\/p>\n
at which E=i”t’ isviused atiid aiso iooking into the How diagram were<\/p>\n
oi”   the impugned product as such is not<\/p>\n
it  impugfned product. is not marketabie. the same is not<\/p>\n
 “ext1.isa’hic. if the mipligiied product, is not excisablc. there is no<\/p>\n
disputed goods are excisable. They also heid thougtrthe<\/p>\n
exemption iioti’fic.arion is attracted, it is not attra;(ited’.V’_’ta: that=<\/p>\n
portion of the goods which are not utilised.ii1”..’t’he’\u00ab
\nof the petroleum products by the it
\nthe extent the final product
\nlayout. used for construction. acViii’vity_:’aiitieAvto their sister
\nconcern, they held the is   and therefore.\n<\/p>\n
they affirmed the.:c:pierz_1a;r(id;’  two orders the
\nassessee preferred  ;’tQ_ the <\/p>\n
7.   going through the
\nrecords    process by which these
\niower suipiiur pcrudped  taking into consideration the I<\/p>\n
 _ . _  $5
\npercentage of su..lphu’r iiithe said product. and the temperature<\/p>\n
marketable.  though it is loosely termed as LSHS. Since<\/p>\n
“v2”\n<\/p>\n
 i_11’1_f)t1g11ed order I’\u20ac’C}’LEi1’\u20acS to be set aside. 2;,<\/p>\n
merit. in the demand of d’LEl’.l\u20acS. Titereiore. the o1’ders__’patss.ed <\/p>\n
the authorities as well as the demands we1*e’7\u00ab.set.fe.Side V’<\/p>\n
allowing the appeal. Aggrieved by the-i”‘sa:::i ‘ordert  Reventi*e<\/p>\n
is in appeal.\n<\/p>\n
8. The learned cotisnel’i’or”u:tl1’e”-.Reventioassaiiing the
\norder of the Tribunal  in dispute that
\nthe impugned   of LSHS which
\nis excisabie.    illribunal that it is not
\nexcisable _o_1fi it  marketable is erroneous
\nand reqtivires Secondly, it was contended that
\nthe materiaiori  .cieai*l\u00bb$r4establishes a portion of the final<\/p>\n
prodtiigittv was Limised [or construction activity, lighting a<\/p>\n
  layout. and also sold to M\/s.Hindustan Gas
\nijtiblic Ltd. Co. and therefore, it was not used
\nfor ca..ptitje’ ge’iiAerai.ion. The demand raised is only to that
\n ar1d;tll’1e exemption notification is not attracted to the<\/p>\n
 _saiVCi’-p.ort.i()n of H16′) demand and E4l1e1’efore, she contends the<\/p>\n
‘*4<\/p>\n
ll<\/p>\n
1 1. Unless the inaiiitairiability of the appeal.’i’s.t:\u00a3flee’i;ied<\/p>\n
one way or the other, the question of going intcj\ufb01theu<\/p>\n
the appeal does not arise. Tl’1e1’efo1’e_, ilie prelii1lili’1’1sf_1’_j,7 poilnt  . <\/p>\n
arise for Consideration in this appeal-._is as x..i’ncle.1_’:”~ <\/p>\n
“whether the appeal   __t’}1e.u
\nagainst the irnpagned  ‘ mailrttatnafl\ufb02e<\/p>\n
u\/s.35 G of the Act”  Cour_t\n<\/p>\n
12. In order to _ap:prec’iat=\u00a7; the laforesaid contention,<\/p>\n
firstly   ‘ see llltlhle statutory provisions as
\ncontained  35L which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
V V 45:’-ISVG;  High Court~ (1) An appeal
\n lie to the___H1gh Court from every order passed
\n  by the Appellate Tribunal on or alter the
\n  2003 {not being an order” relating,
\n things, to the determination of any
\n qti-epsthiolh having :1 relation to the rate of duty of<\/p>\n
excise or to the value of goods for the purposes of
\n.. ,.,,;g15s(:’SSI1’1(3I1l’,}, if the ‘I–iigla Court is satisfied that the<\/p>\n
case involves a stzbstantial qtiestion of law.<\/p>\n
axe,<\/p>\n
l2<\/p>\n
351.. Appeal to the Supreme <\/p>\n
appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from__\u00ab–‘–i.<\/p>\n
{ct} an_yjudgmer1tQfihe High Coiir\u00a3_.dVdeii2;ei*e\u00a7::l._ 3<\/p>\n
(i) in an appeal n1ade’i1rrdeA19l SeC\u20ac’ivo’n.<\/p>\n
or _ V _\n<\/p>\n
(ii) on a refereirclerplhllriiade lin1dlerl’lSe'{:iion
\n35c. b’y._i:he ,Appe.lE3.iesrflribdrial before<\/p>\n
the 1st”‘dziy.oi*q\u00a2;.iy,   _
\n[iii] .On a A.re.f:\u00e9_re1ie.e 1\/,111.adel”:a_r1de1′ section
\n in   on its own
\n1″  im-c’il*u;_ior1-:_o1jl. on ar1’:o1″al application made<\/p>\n
ll * flay or ofihe party aggrieved,<\/p>\n
 after passing of the
\n‘  High Court; certi\ufb01es to
\n= Vbe a._fiii~.olne for appeal to the Supreme<\/p>\n
‘V ” =..Courf.: or<\/p>\n
lb) any order passed before the<\/p>\n
‘l ..e”staLjlisl1n1eni of the National T ax Tribunal<\/p>\n
V A  Appellate Tribunal having a relation to<\/p>\n
l ‘the rate of duty of excise or to the Value of<\/p>\n
goods for purposes of assessment.”\n<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
A ‘oare reading of the aforesaid provisions n1ake\u00bbs”-i.te:’*e1lear<\/p>\n
what are the matters which are eognisable by  <\/p>\n
and as welt as by the Supreme Coti1ft:;””Any   the V<\/p>\n
Appellate Tribunal other than   <\/p>\n
question having a relation. to  ofA.cl!t.ity’V of: “to the C<\/p>\n
value of duty of goods for the_….\u00a7ll\\1rpose oi”C’asVsessi:l”1″1ent falls
\nwithin the _l1,.lI’iSdiCtlOI”ll bi;l:”tI1\u00a2l–. in al3P\u20acal Under
\nSection 350. If t”he detei’minat.ion of any
\nquestion     of excise OI’ t;o t.he
\nValue of    assessment, the same
\nfalls   of the Supreme Court under<\/p>\n
Section 35lLt{]o]t. _ ‘liar lllot;.h”e.rll”_;u}oi*ds, the determination of any<\/p>\n
 qU\u20acS’lI_t3iFi 1*e1atinlg~t.o:the rate of duty of excise or to the value of<\/p>\n
 goods for.ti’3.eA”\u00abpVt11*pose of assessment, cannot be agitated in<\/p>\n
  Expressly the statute has excluded the<\/p>\n
C it _ j1t.1i*isd-itttion oil”lt’.he High Court in appeal 1.1nder Section 35G and<\/p>\n
h7.e;\u00bb\u00a3C11,1sive’~ji.11*isdiction is conferred on the Suprenie Court in<\/p>\n
” _ t.hes\u00bbe..mat.te1’s. The langtiage employed in these two sections<\/p>\n
it
\nLi<\/p>\n
2 ‘-3j\u20aciC’7v*a\ufb02I’1i. \\iro1’ds are as under: ~ K<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
read together is Clear and there is no scope for any dtiodtibdttvt\u00e9or<\/p>\n
confusion in this regard.\n<\/p>\n
13. it is argued as the Xvordings of the”‘se.c’tionV.stands <\/p>\n
it is only in respect of the two typeshof cases the j.o”r\u00a3sdtctito’13:Veof
\nthe High Court is denuded. TI’1\u00bbeyt_sre :V–‘7. ‘
\n1} Where the assessment  to ‘t.he,.V:deternatnation of
\nthe rate of dttiygtt  V. t t It
\n2} The question relates to  L:i.et\u00e9rnttn,(;.tton of the value of<\/p>\n
 the  31;;\n<\/p>\n
Any question  relation to these two aspects<\/p>\n
alone, the Higli’Coo.rt’hats\u00b0no jurisdiction and in respect of<\/p>\n
‘V V’ \u00ab–otl1.e-is  it hasHji1’1’iSCiiCtiO11.<\/p>\n
h’-.14″-.V ‘ 7113 order’ to appreciate this contention, we have to<\/p>\n
–V caret;tilly”‘–Vsee wordings ernpioyed by the legisiature. The<\/p>\n
a, ,~
\n3\/<\/p>\n
15<\/span><\/p>\n
“Not. being an order relating. among other things. to
\nthe determirxaiion of any question having a reIat’io–21:”~\u00ab._”‘*.
\nto the rate of duty of excise or to the value q;f_gbods  -1-<\/p>\n
‘for the purposes of assessmertt”.\n<\/p>\n
The key word in the said p1’ovisiori._is “for tVhe.VpL1rp:oseV’of<\/p>\n
assessment”. That means the o_rd~er refer1__’ed,to.:thereiiis is an’<\/p>\n
order passed in the course of asrsessnleliatt ‘I’herel’.ore:.\u00a7 all orders
\npassed in the course of  the determination
\nof any question having  ivolllduty of excise or
\nto the value:.Qt\u00a7l–.._gQ$:\u00a7{:S.:;  matter of appeal
\nbefore the   -‘use of the word ‘among other
\nthings’ itis_  order which may not be directly<\/p>\n
1’elate\u00a7:i’te_t’r1e rate ‘or duty or the Value of goods, however which<\/p>\n
V. “are intierriiirigled With\ufb02lthose matters are also excluded. In other<\/p>\n
t\ufb01words._ti1ose:fare\u00ab–. not the only orders contemplated by the<\/p>\n
legishlation; order to understand the width and depth of the<\/p>\n
— orders covered under these words, it is necessary to know the<\/p>\n
 .i11ean__ing of “assessment”. 3;\n<\/p>\n
WHAT IS ASSESSMENT?\n<\/p>\n
15. The word “assessment.” is used as .r\ufb01e–2111ing<\/p>\n
sometimes the c0n’1pL11.211.i0n of rate of duty. sQr:1e’ii11’1’e.s; {he<\/p>\n
assessable value of goods and sometimes the \\vhQ1efp’r0Seedu.fe W<\/p>\n
laid down under the Act for iI11p0sV.i;1iebd’uty”<.lia-biliiiy.iipoi\ufb01. ihe<\/p>\n
mam1facLLirer or importer. The \\vC:rd"..assessf;*ne11t =is,u_ <\/p>\n
capable of bearing a very cO111q51=ehe11s\u00a7ve w1I1_"ea\ufb012'Vn\u20ac3i" in the
\nContext, ii. can c0r11p:jehen.d"" 'the "whole "'pr0eedure for<\/p>\n
ascteytaining and imposing (iii Eial:iiIi\ufb01,yi;-.  <\/p>\n
 *  ,\u00a2dLi:ii'(?i1'  the Case of COMMISSIONER
\nOF INCOME  \u00bb'I\u00a7HEMcILaND RAMDAS has observed<\/p>\n
as 1.1i–idef~ :-\u00ab<\/p>\n
   Qf the pecuiiarziies Of most Incomeizax
\n1  is?'-{hats the word 'assessment' is used as
\nf'i1\u20aciif:'i~if?1:(:j sometimes the compui'aI.ion of income.
\na sQr'riexi:in'1es the determination of the amount of tax
\nficiyable and. sometimes the whole procedure laid<\/p>\n
down in the Act: for imposin_q liability upon the<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
taxpayer. T he Indian Incomewtax Act’ is r1o__<\/p>\n
exception in this respect: …..\n<\/p>\n
37. in HIRJIBHAI TRIBHUVANDAS  <\/p>\n
OFFICER RAJNANDGAON AND AN\u20ac:)h’I”‘HER\u00a2_[1e958:Ah33_ _I:1’R:744x.13] 3.<\/p>\n
it was held as under-\n<\/p>\n
“In the normal ser1se\u00bb””ite assess”‘,.V:rhear1s} “to
\nfbc ‘the amount:  dtte_tort.._t:o’V%’e{eter’rnViheHsttch
\namount.”. The  is to the
\nsame purpose ar1af”‘tU’0:;ttdV ‘th_u.s  ihcvthaded tn the<\/p>\n
COf1T10iCtf.ft)I1  the ‘ii{3I’i:’?f_1 “;assVess’a”1’1eat.;””<\/p>\n
   assessment and collection
\n ttr’1de:;s”tar1d_:’thehf: trtclude all the processes<\/p>\n
by i;’uI__14tch the  ascertained. demanded and
\nghreatiseti  being one of these
\n.<'_pL*'ocess corhes"'tvttI1ir1 the ambit qf the phraseotogy<\/p>\n
V' " \u00bb.\n<\/p>\n
  be observed that section 34 Qf the
\nIr}et)r_rt\u00e92~thax Act cor1t’en1plat”eSfo1tr d;’fferent cases in
\n~’wi’1′;z’cf1 t.he power to assess escaped income has<\/p>\n
A  been given. Where there has been no assessment
\n” at all, the term “assessment” would be appropriate
\nand where there was an assessment at” too low (1<\/p>\n
ii<\/p>\n
x..\u00bb””‘-\n<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
rate or with iu’iji.:.st:if’ied exemptions, the term “reg___
\nassessrneni” would be appropriate. It was t:hiis._i”..
\nnecessary to resort’ to the use of two df\ufb02erer1i.,ter1_&ns_’  ”
\nto cover with clarity the chfferent cases
\nin that section. This does not rnean the-.thift’e.:i\u20ac.rn’L\u00a7”_
\nshould be treated as mutually :exclzi.s?iu:e.u’._ it h
\nIn interpret.in_q the ierni.__”assessrneni”‘v  <\/p>\n
used in Section 7 of iheV:”Taxat’io.’1._Laios it
\nshould be given its plain meanirig. It shoiiltt  be
\nunderst-pod in ang}: ‘restr’ie’t’e;j:  especial  in
\nwhich it may have     Inaian Income
\ntax Act in a particular’ it  <\/p>\n
1%}. –. ‘rh\u00a7   ‘iri the case of INCOME TAX<\/p>\n
OFFICER, BANGALORE\u00bb~i2s”_K.iV.GURUSWA1|dl’Y [1 958 ITR VOL.<\/p>\n
 34  explaiiimg vtheimeaning the word assessment arising<\/p>\n
in   t.h’e:i11..\ufb01Cbr;1e Tax Act has held as under: ~<\/p>\n
1  income means the total amount of<\/p>\n
A  incorne,j’..–15r’Qfits and gains computed in the manner
\niaitti; down in the Act. and there are no good.<\/p>\n
” +.__reasons why the word “assessment” occurring in<\/p>\n
 saving provisions should be restricted in the<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
manner suggested. so as to exclude proceedings”fort”:g:
\nassessment. of escaped income or iiridervasisessleif :”
\nincome. ………. .. In its normal sense, ._
\nmeans “to fit the amount q;”:’t-t\u00a7\u00a7\u00bbt”o,+ atop  V’
\nsuch arnoiint”. The process Qll”1ije~a’_ssessrnevrit,is it
\nthe same purpose aria’-..__ is llinclluded:din;
\nconnotation of the term “asses”smerit’l\u00a7’ ~.The-rea\u00e9toris
\nwhich led us to give a co;’rip–rehens_ive  to<\/p>\n
the word “assess”rnerit”‘–.3(I) of the
\nFinance Act, 1950. _operateV__lez\u00a7gudtl_i,i ‘it._iiVthl” regard to<\/p>\n
the saving proi;~isio.i:1s i_1n_oEer’~.p’resent: consideration.”<\/p>\n
 “t_A’l:A1″el5″Si1pr~eme{e0:ii:’1’_ii’: the case of C.A.ABRAHAM —
\nVS- INC(5ME 7— I-j.0FFI\u00a7}’ER, KOTTAYAM. AND ANOTHER<\/p>\n
explaining the nieenving’-oi” the word assessment in the context<\/p>\n
l V. of  Tax Aetifllhevld as under :–\n<\/p>\n
 =   of the provisions of Chapter IV of
\n‘the  ..5’sz,i[ficierit;ty discloses that the word
\n“as—-sessrnent.” has been used in its widest<\/p>\n
con.notat”ion in that chapter. The title of the chapter
\n‘is “Deductions and Assessment.” The section<\/p>\n
which deals iuit.h assessment merely as<\/p>\n
“ex?\n<\/p>\n
20<\/span><\/p>\n
compiitat.ion of income is section 23; but seUeral”L”;_aV<\/p>\n
sections deal not with computation of iricorne,  ‘7’<\/p>\n
determination of liability, machinery <\/p>\n
liability and the procedure in’t:’hat”be_halfi.;\u00ab Sectiorinh’<\/p>\n
ISA deals with advance pa.i;nie:ntc’lV of”~.t,a:t_” <\/p>\n
imposition of penalties for-.__failiire.V_to carry”ottii”gie_V’\u00a7<\/p>\n
provisions therein. Sectioi’i,2’3A deals with piower
\nto assess iridividitdl mern.bers”L_otf; certain Alcornpavnies
\non the income deeined to–,ha_ve ubeen”distr’ibul’ed as
\ndividend, section   w’i’t:~h”o\u00e9.svsessinent in
\ncase of deioaijtttre[froni’t.\u00abt’a):abile~. tories, section
\n248 collection oj  outuof the estate of
\ndeCease df:.t  25 deals with
\naVssessn’ient: H  of -discontinued business,
\nS\u00e9cti\u00e9n 25\/Vi’:’.tvith~_:d:3$\u00e9;3srnent after partition of
\nHindi:4_tindiiiidedljaniiilies and sections 29, 31, 33<\/p>\n
;and 35 deal”u}ithV’f,he issue of demand notices and<\/p>\n
._.”:th\u00a7;.t_\u00a5\/’i.iing oj”ap’pedls and for reviewing assessment
\n __a?1df~se-etion 34 deals with assessment of incomes<\/p>\n
 tol’iic’ii_hcii)e'”escaped assessment.<\/p>\n
 The expression. “assessment” used in these<\/p>\n
T sections is not used merely in the sense of<\/p>\n
, aCOlTlplLffCliIi()Tl of income and there is in our\ufb01tdgtnent.<\/p>\n
no ground for holding that when by section. 44, it is<\/p>\n
21<\/span><\/p>\n
declared that the partners or meinbers of
\nassociation shall be jointly and severally  ‘7’
\nassessment, it is only intended to
\nliability to computation of incofrriel limiter section.\n<\/p>\n
and not to the application    iii
\ndeclaration and impositiojn-..o.f <\/p>\n
machinery for enforcement thereof.\n<\/p>\n
Nor has the  provisions of
\nChapter IV shall so to such
\nassessrrzentlfila._res;irictecl;   it says
\nthat all the  shall apply so
\nfar as    which have<\/p>\n
disco’ntiniled  l5tisiness’L”””” ‘
\nDETEI{l\u00a7lIINAfI’I(l\u00abN ‘MEAD! I<\/p>\n
20. it  Sitmiiarly”vt’he’lme\u00e9iiing of the word “determination”<\/p>\n
also has to be kept’ <\/p>\n
  ling’JASWANIVMSUGAR MILLS LTD. MEERUT -123-<\/p>\n
  AND OTHERS, reported in AIR 1963<\/p>\n
 _ V  context in which it occurs in Art.I36 signifies an<\/p>\n
 otjzsonr 677 (V 50 c 104), it is held as tinder.’-<\/p>\n
“IO. The expression “determination” in the<\/p>\n
\u00a333\/\/,..\n<\/p>\n
22<\/span><\/p>\n
effecijiue expressiori of opinion whicrh ends
\ncontroversy or a dispute by some ai1i:hop1,iy4’_\u00bbt’o’:7 V
\nwhom it is submit’ied under a valid
\ndisposal. The expression “order’\u00bb” r71i1si”‘li’ail;\u00a7’v
\na similar meaning. except that it  “not \u00e9operlatef \u00abV
\nto end the dispute. Deierinir1la.t_ionVor orderniusi
\nbe judicial or qlt(I.’3i:]”llClfiLK’.I’u(.iil;..1l9LlI’\u00a3Z’Al_l,f adnzi.iiist;\u00a7at~ii.u,e
\nor executive direction is lnotj:’cioVnieniplated to} be
\nmade the siibjectldnatterllofappealAto i’his”C”ourt’.
\nThe essence of the a1tt’FioVrTii’ty  ‘Court being
\nJ’udi.cial, athis :.\u20ac3oul’;i’    exercise
\nadminisIfaiiil.ie or”\u00ab.e)cec’L”ttiv’e  i.e. character<\/p>\n
of thelpo_we}*”C:1_r1]e1jfeVd”-z.ip’on” thi.s’Court original or<\/p>\n
  being judicial, the
\nCVl\u20ac’f(5.lF’4l_7’il’VT’iC’IlfViO.iV;l”s<'oi'-_t5}'d\u00e9iT. sought to be appealed
\nfror'nrn=,istV' _h4a.i)e the character of a judicial<\/p>\n
'(1'i;udlC{1\u00bbl";OlI.\n<\/p>\n
‘V 7   A.  ….. .. 9<\/p>\n
“2l’;._ it YV\u20ac21i_Va-mother word which also assumes importance<\/p>\n
is ‘the’hmeg1.ni:i.gAof the word “GoocIs”.<\/p>\n
 ‘<\/p>\n
23<\/span><\/p>\n
In the Case or UNION OF INDIA AND  -~<\/p>\n
VS — DELHI CLOTH AND GENERAL was  4_<\/p>\n
OTHERS REPORTED IN AIR 1963:SC.79\u00a7I .MTee’.~f1OOst’it:g,1t’iOnuA <\/p>\n
Bench Of the Supreme COL1ri: while \u20aciOns'{T’t1’ing;’*:heygo\u00e9fci
\nheld as ur1der:~
\n“Moreover. the dejit1i\ufb01O;1$  ‘gOOcis’__{na}’5:e it
\nclear that to becO.rr\u00a3e– ‘gO_Od\u00a7s.’  “an’.a”fticles must; be
\nsomething which can Ofdificifiiy .{Oj’.he market<\/p>\n
to be bOL1gf’1:1′. (i.’._i_’1d s_Old* ‘ ‘~ <\/p>\n
22. _  SUGAR MILLS LTD. AND<\/p>\n
ANOTHER:  . Vs’.   OF INDIA AND ANOTHER<\/p>\n
REPQRTED 1,; AIR’ 2963 sc 9.22 has heid as uI1der:–<\/p>\n
& V  Acteaarges duty On the manufacture Of
\n word ‘marugfacture’ implies a change
\n  change in the raw material is not
\n rwlcxvfligjaettzre. There must be such a trans; formation<\/p>\n
t’f1a_1″ a new and d\ufb02erent: article must emerge<\/p>\n
“”~havi.ng a distirtctive name. character or use.<\/p>\n
24<\/span><\/p>\n
As the Act does not define goods, ”\n<\/p>\n
legislature must be taken to have used  u\ufb01lorldj *’
\nin its ordinary dictionary meaning. T
\nmeaning is that to become;”goods\u00a2_ it n:1.l$’lb\u00ab._be~.f}
\nsomething which can ordir1aril_t’j<\u00abcorae' to it A<\/p>\n
to be bought and sold and is___Vlcnou\u00bb-nlto the 'rna;"lCe_t.:' <\/p>\n
23. En BHOR 11\\’.z.)”trs1tf\u00e921r;s,l”L:1f1)l;’~,,\u00abevs — COLLECTOR
\nOF CENTRAL EXCISE   (40) E.L.T) 280
\n(s.c.) THE APEX  he1_a'”‘las”_’u\u00a71d\u00e9r
\n1 fflt–i:__appe.drs under the Central
\nExbt\u00e9e-Aer: asl:is”‘stood’ at the”relevant time, in order
\n be   in the entry t.he first
\ncondition was’* a result of manufacture
\n_ goods in icomelin tosexis tence.\n<\/p>\n
. I  For Artiele4s\u00ab’to be goods these must be known
\n ‘V ‘ll”l’lLr’iI:g’;.’;’f’l”1GVT’lC\u20ac’l as such or these must be capable of
\n the market as goods. Actual sale in
\nthe fnark\u00a7el is not necessary. user in the captive<\/p>\n
l .’,.’OltlSLtmptiO71 is not determirtative but the Articles<\/p>\n
 it   be capable of being sold in the market or<\/p>\n
fknouan in the market as goods.”\n<\/p>\n
25<\/span><\/p>\n
24. In the case of MOTI LAMINATES PVT.  –~<\/p>\n
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EX. AHMEDABAD .1995 :f*fSjt.t%iL:i*t*v.’<\/p>\n
241(s.c.) THE APEX comm’ held as tmder :9 H  ‘<\/p>\n
“9. Although the gauge’ q}f’*e\u00a7ccise_”‘:_.\u00a7~’g
\nmanufacture or prodLtct1’on..__of t’bhe_ goodS5v’t”)i.Jgt:~_gVtVf1e
\nentire concept’ of bringing gjta\ufb01etu commodity  is
\nlinked with rnark\u20ac\u00a7Qbtti\u00a21J’.”” x”\u00ab:1.Tticlet ‘ doesvdjnot
\nbecome goods in thettbcornnton  unless by
\nproduction or manVufac.tjtLre  new and
\ndg(ferent:.m’rbroug}’\u00a7a_c o;tt.:…iui1.tch”.jcan  bought and
\nsold. 5    t \u00ab Lt <\/p>\n
 H   attract” excise duty
\nrn:i.:st”‘ sat’is_f;g;}’?i:t1e ”  rnarket’ability. The tariff
\nschedute   the goods in specific and<\/p>\n
ggener tbbcategobry  not alter the basic character\n<\/p>\n
-behbtioficevtabilitytb “ITr’teVduty is attracted not because an
\n ,Vart:tcEe:’tsi”Covered in any of the items or it falls in
\n“-t”.___revs\u00e9tittarticategory but it mustfurther have been
\n pFQd1t;n’\u00e92’d’ or manufactured and it’ is capable of
\nbetng bought and sold. ”\n<\/p>\n
5,<\/p>\n
my ,.\n<\/p>\n
26<\/span><\/p>\n
25. The Apex Court’ in the case of MOTI_<\/p>\n
PVT. LTD. vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL  <\/p>\n
reported in 1995(76) ELT 241 (S\u00a2’3J)>H>irite2’pi’et.i:1g\ufb02VSeetioh* shm-Vij A’<\/p>\n
the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1942L.h\u00e9i-s_A.held es <\/p>\n
“Section 3 levies duty “VQ%%..V”>all Vexcisat\ufb01e
\nmentioned. in the scf1ed_LLlVV\u00e9:A;’v._p’rovided;’ –l5?_fLAe’gV:\u00a7 are
\nproduced or mah’:–.;.f.’a–ctLL1}ed.\u00a7g– . Vt\\’F.he\u00bbrej’ore, when the
\ngoods are specified  they are
\nexcisabte goods,  staid goods can be
\ns11bject_e\u00a7:;?. qj   ‘ uwhether they are
\npr’odu\u20ace_ed;:.’or  person on whom
\nd_uty._ –fsV\ufb01sQt~r.g’}1t be ~ levied. T he expression
\nproduetiort ._.(‘)’.”:’.:’~.t;It(Z1t%t’i\u00a7jdC[‘LlI’8 has further been
\nexplauzedv by -__thAts Court to mean that the goods so
\n gar-oduced’ “.’=”f,1ttSI’ satisfy the test’ of marketabitttry.
\ndC\u00e9ousequentlyrutthts always open to the assessee to<\/p>\n
3  even though goods in which he was
\n business were excisable goods being
\n mertttohed. tn the schedule, but they Could not be
\nszvthjectiect to duty as they were not goods either
\n~._because they were not produced or manufactured<\/p>\n
by It or [f they had been produced or<\/p>\n
27<\/span><\/p>\n
mam.;factured_. they were not marketed or ca;QdI3l_”e._
\nof being marketed, ” d d V<\/p>\n
MEANING OF “RATE OF DUTY”\n<\/p>\n
26. It is in this backgrotlnd xgire..:1ave_ to_”int.ef}3\\1’e’Egthe<\/p>\n
word rate of duty.\n<\/p>\n
The question is,  dnieianjingd\ufb01attaehed to
\nthe ‘rate of duty’ as vA.u1:.dedt;A”‘ihese Atmiovisions. In
\norder to understand  and the dispute<\/p>\n
relating to that,   to reierdio iihe meaning assigned to<\/p>\n
the said word’dv.by..V_t.’he ‘P.a\ufb02iame’nt by way of an explanation to
\nsub-seeii.oI1 [5}_ byp\u00e9iilleiidiiienti Act. 29\/ “1988. The said
\nani.endmei?1i..’v’v*a.s  to be brought into force ;I’0I1’l the<\/p>\n
dateito xi:-e I3.otdi’I”ied,_ ____ ijlowever. it’ was not brought. into force at<\/p>\n
  1\\:Io:iavi’th_sta11ding the same, in order to understand the<\/p>\n
   to the word ‘rate of duiy’ by the Parliament:<\/p>\n
  ‘iI}S\u20ac(‘,’i.vii)E1S 350: and 35L of the Act which reads as under 1\u00bb<\/p>\n
as ‘per tsheiidaforesaid intended amendment, the same could be<\/p>\n
1.oo1’\u00a7eds”inio’in order to appreeiatte the phrase ‘rate of duty’ used<\/p>\n
28<\/span><\/p>\n
“Explanation: For the purposes of this sub-section,<\/p>\n
the det,erminat’ion of a rate of duty in relation to any<\/p>\n
goods or uah.tat.1’or’t Qf any goods jot’ the pl4[rpOS\u20acl)l!”r3″..'(‘:B:fr_<\/p>\n
assessment of duty includes the d\u20acI’\u20acFIT1.i!1a[‘iO?t.uQf”‘Cl_<\/p>\n
quest’ton~<\/p>\n
(1) relating to the rate of duty of exctse.Jt.ot_:<\/p>\n
being in force, whether tu7,’deVr”‘:h\u00abe1.\u00abCent:t*a!_ <\/p>\n
Excise Tartff Act”, 1985 or t’s::(1di:’%’_t’t  AV  <\/p>\n
Central Act providing’\/orshthe tevytarid coltecttgom
\nof any duty ofexctse. in feIat\u00bbton toV”ar_1ygo0cfs<\/p>\n
on or after the 281t\u00a7.–g:tay  19<\u00a76;'or <\/p>\n
t'fe:a:i::;g  the.:'value""'of goods for the
\npturp:')ses Voj"fassessh1.e'nt' of any duty in cases<\/p>\n
where the assesstnentts made on or after the<\/p>\n
X 281.12 day o\/'Fe:!jrtt:1r;j;..1986. or<\/p>\n
4_"5?.C)L{Jhe.tt1er ar1y…..goods are exctsabte goods or<\/p>\n
' 2 , z_:,;}A1e:?ti:e.f'*~t'Vhe rate Q\/'duty ofexctse on any goods<\/p>\n
is hit; torch' – . V <\/p>\n
d)u;z-:\u00a2g,\u00e9;\u00a7j_t:2:} any goods fall under a particular<\/p>\n
 fleadthg or subheading of the Schedule to the<\/p>\n
 ..  Central Excise Tariff Act”, \u00a3985. or the<\/p>\n
:.A.~Addtt:tc)r1aI Duties of Excise {Goods of Special<\/p>\n
Importance) Act”, 195′? or the Addt\ufb01onat Duties<\/p>\n
29<\/span><\/p>\n
of Excise (Textiles and Textile Articles} Act,<\/p>\n
1978. or that: any goods are or not covered by an
\nparIicula.r non_’fz’caI’ion or order issued by ”
\nCentral Government. or the Board. as ll1e-u’case.\u00aby:’
\nmay be. gran (‘mg {oral or parlictlexenlpiiorl*_,l}}ern”=.
\nduty: or   _ l _  <\/p>\n
e) whether the value of  gjookis _f()._*.. the;
\npurposes of assessmenil galuly of
\nbe enhanced or reducedlzl’  acmftzcin or
\nreduction of the ‘”aI.noun1’s” ii:.lrespecl ofvvsulch
\nmatters as are specgficallg_”‘i’his Act”<\/p>\n
 ~perl{1s.a’1  1.l’1.e\u00bb’~..ex’p1″anaiion makes it clear that
\ndeter111vi11al;ionrol”li;he_ra! means whether any goods are
\nexeisable \u00a7o.oC1s_ and  the rate of duty of excise on any<\/p>\n
goods is’~ni1. Whether the said goods are or are not covered<\/p>\n
 on-der 2; par.tVie~L\/1_1a1′ ;no1’.ifi<:ation or order issued by the Central<\/p>\n
"L1\u00abo{re;fnn1eff1'i.. __or,. the Board , as the case may be, granting total<\/p>\n
or oart:1'a..1: lexenlption from duty and whether the value of any<\/p>\n
  fof lhe purpose of assessment of duty of excise shall be<\/p>\n
_'  er;h'ariced or reduced by addition or reducl:ion of the a,mounl.s<\/p>\n
30<\/span><\/p>\n
in respect of such niatters as are specifically _p1fo.\\-\u00e9idetishiider<\/p>\n
the Act. Though the det.em’1ina’t.ion of the worti._dtit}y._rha.y” 1191.’;<\/p>\n
i.r1e1u.de all those cguestions. the exp’Eah’ation1.rnakes’ ii. elear the<\/p>\n
afoi-esaid expanded meaning is to  the.\n<\/p>\n
phrase for the purpose of thiVs’–s_ieet.ioI1A.on1y;  the
\nsaid explanation is added” to   \\vhie}’;..,dee:1s with the
\npower of revision of Board’ Central Excise
\nin C\u20acI.’1\u00bb8eif1 CEISE5    to be conveyed
\nby the    while exercising the
\nrevisional  those questions. That
\nin no   of”t1nde1’standing the meaning of
\nthe phrases_’_”1’ateVV’of the contrary it clearly sets out<\/p>\n
the “ii_\u00a7:1te1’it–ioii of 1egisEa’tt:re In so far as the meaning to be<\/p>\n
 f.’.o”~the said phrase. Therefore. the said meaning<\/p>\n
“i:otif1.d.b”e r’eadv.i_’rii:o the phrase whereever it is used in the other<\/p>\n
parts ().{.:’.J{.11.(3:”” statute.  held by the Apex Court. in Nat\/in<\/p>\n
‘”..V”Cher:1ie’a3s case. It also would be in coni’o1’mit:y with the<\/p>\n
‘ i.1ii.er.p51’etatir)11 piaced on the said phrase by the Apex Court” as<\/p>\n
 .. __weEE as the Higli Court. as is ciear from the followirlg decisions.<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
3,-\n<\/p>\n
31<\/span><\/p>\n
27. The Supreme Court had an occasion_i.o_’C;oiasider<\/p>\n
the meaning of the word ‘rate’ in SUNDARAM  <\/p>\n
(PRIVATE) LIMITED vs commrssromm “oF.;4.ii\\rC:_)Ji1E1’\u00ab’ TAX,’  <\/p>\n
MADRAS [1967 VOL. 66 Int 66~e\u00a71\u00b0vghe1~e”‘;_::’Awas
\nunder:– V 4’ Vb  V b<\/p>\n
“The ;~'(l:SSl\u00a3H11?3’i’f0?;l_: –  ihe\ufb02 bexgeressiori<\/p>\n
“raie” has been used in Sjecllloa meaning a
\n‘fraction oj”i’olal iricome  gr-:_dgn1er1t not
\nwarrani’ed’\u00ab..B;i;  iise…’of”\u00abrh’e’.jexb_ression “rate” in<\/p>\n
ihe co:’2i\u00e9Jxl:5:._izil ‘Loifiich\u00abe.._iL’-7oecu.rs~. undoubtedly a<\/p>\n
relalfiori   K income and the tax
\nehargede the relation need not be of<\/p>\n
the neaiure Qf  ofjraciion. The expression<\/p>\n
X _”iraie”Ki”s   the sense qf a standard or
\n“5\u00a5.r71:eAasilre.  the tax is computable by the<\/p>\n
A  _V  of a prescribed standard or measure,
\niitoiigvli  directly related to taxable income. it
\n maybbei called tax computed at a certain rule. We<\/p>\n
a agsreehvioith the High Court that the rebate of tax
\narid the reduction of such rebaie are essentially<\/p>\n
3%\n<\/p>\n
– :\n<\/p>\n
_:–‘matt.’ers of measure or standards of rate. ”<\/p>\n
32<\/span><\/p>\n
28. A Division Bench of the Andhra Prades’hd”‘-High<\/p>\n
Court in the ease of CRANE BETEL NUT Powbs\ufb01’<\/p>\n
VS – COMMISSIONER REPORTED__IN 2005 “{5} Q4)\u00bb <\/p>\n
held that the dete1’m.iI1ati0n. of theA;4ratjeo of  in  to d<\/p>\n
any goods mciudes determination of ‘:1 t;:;es’tiVoiL\u00a7wI:;e1.her any’<\/p>\n
goods are exctisabie or not   Bench of the
\nAndhra Pradesh High   eoM1i\u00a71ss1oNER OF
\nC.EX.,    1- “V”REFRIGERATI0N
\nINDUSTRIES?_:fej\u00a7d.:fted’– sine’  201 (AP) heid that
\nthe question’    dany undertaken in the
\nservic: \u00a3;t\\n,\/x\\\\5v;-;VfV  smounts to manufacture of
\nstartersddby\u00e9dthedres1o.o11dde1o%\u00a7’x5i’ not, and if the goods produced<\/p>\n
d11ring that I\ufb01ocess’ are exeisable goods or not would fall within<\/p>\n
the’e”7d1e:in.if\u00a7g of tlneddde\ufb01cpression ‘determination of the rate of<\/p>\n
  the value of the goods for the purposes of<\/p>\n
 of the”Aet.\n<\/p>\n
ass.eVssm..ef1:t:’ofV’duty’ used in Section 358(1) and Section 35L(b]<\/p>\n
B\/.e<\/p>\n
29. I*'()11c)wi11g the said judgment a lmvision Bentth of<\/p>\n
the Delhi }*f1’g11 Court. in the case o\u00a3’ COMMISS1’QNERV,”OF<\/p>\n
SERVICE TAX VS. DELHI GYMKHANA cLU._B3. .o in,<\/p>\n
2009 (16) same 129(Del.] held __1.,h;,_u 125′”{o11e1ii’o’;VqLies\ufb01Q:1e-_git:<\/p>\n
cietermination relates to the rate oI”._d’u={:y  \u00e9xcise”o1’V{3i’e\u00ab.{}:i:lL1e<\/p>\n
of goods for the purposeS oi: 21._s.sese’n-1ef1iV apii3’e\u00a7i\u00e9;Iv\u00ab–1.i4c:s–V3i,o the <\/p>\n
Supreme Court.\n<\/p>\n
30. The BVo111bayA.I\u00e9{i:,”<g17L.(Jo1T1,\u00e9f1.i"\ufb01"1li'\u00e9-'ease of COMMR. or<\/p>\n
C.EX., NAGPUR  "I-"ERRO AND ALLIED<\/p>\n
CHEMICALS Li*iJ.'j'j-rgzpoftegi' ~91 20091234) ELT 220 (Bom.) at<\/p>\n
para 6 held\ufb01s  "\n<\/p>\n
A _  }’1Veiz}e”eor1.sidered the rival contentions
\n‘   ‘_’or\u00a7.”b_eha\u00a3f of parties and also perused the
\nSections 356 and 35L{b} Qf the Act of<\/p>\n
A  194:4 appeal agcdnst the order passed by the
\n\u00a3ijr2\u00e9j\u00a2’lIate Tn’b1.uo1a1 would lie to the High Court<\/p>\n
A’ ‘ exeept an order relating. among other things. to the<\/p>\n
VV ‘– –\ufb01lererminai”fon. of c:m.y quesrion. having a relatI’.on. to<\/p>\n
the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods <\/p>\n
34<\/span><\/p>\n
for purposes of assessment. Secrion
\nprovides that an appeal against an order
\nby the Appellate Tribunal re.l.aiii_ng ahio’r’1g’_fV
\nthings, to the determination  arig  l1a’.oi’l’2g__l  A’
\na relaiion to the rate Of dlLaJ”Qj\\”!?w’CClS\u20ac3.:iC2!fill) “izbe;
\nvalue of goods jor purpos’\u00e9s_ of aissessrrleril'”‘a}ol1ld:<\/p>\n
lie to the Supreme Courl.  ilius, .C.”l’t’3C1:l:’Lf”i’Ol?:3’l lhe
\naforesaid proviso all appeaI_uag.ains(- glnuorder
\npassed by the Appei_l_ale among
\nother things, vijo the  question
\nhaving   lo iilgelllralle.o]”‘duiy” of excise or to
\nthe  pllrposes of assessment’
\n1lgou.ldA:.i_he Sliprerrze—–C.oL’lrl and not the High<\/p>\n
Cf0ur_l..” V V’ <\/p>\n
31.  Apexlfilloalri. in the Case of I.T.C.LTD. —- VS —<\/p>\n
, . g_ comizcfrog OFl”‘CEN’FRAL EXCISE, PATNA REPORTED IN<\/p>\n
 ‘1Q97[9=4)V’E}’Il{T\u00a2.456 [S.C.} dealing with Section 35L(‘o} of the<\/p>\n
Ceal’ra1  1944 has held as under :-\n<\/p>\n
“A perusal of the said. clause shows that an
\nV x  ‘appeal lies lo this Court against an order passed
\nby the ‘Fr1’bur1al relating to the delerminalion Q\/”any E<\/p>\n
;\/<\/p>\n
”  ‘CASE ZPREMIER IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT LTD. M VS \u00bb-<\/p>\n
35<\/span><\/p>\n
question relating lo {he rate of duly of excisepr
\nthe value of goods for the purposes of assc:ssmeri’ir:.l:”‘
\nSrz’.Ra.uinder Narain as SIll)HIH7V1.lll.(3Cl   ‘-
\nimpugned order passed by (‘I11-eh znpw;;;.i,_re1q–::.\u00a7s–.;o.;””‘
\nthe value of goods . The said l;u_esi:ior1 relaling \u00abto  V
\nualue of goods has l1oz,ueL_=e’:~=,_ arisen on lhe
\nfor refund of excise ClLll>y_’>:’Sllbl71l’l.l\u20acCl:I  ‘U16
\nappellant; be ore  CVolleclor.d”Iri’l our
\nopmion. the ques\ufb02ori  1}o.lz:liaiiori’\u00a3gi3ods in the
\ncontext of a I’E.f]’.Lll’l’iul”\u00bbC:C:U’ll”lOAl’ as a
\nquestion  re:lalioLr\u00a3”;to.”tl1:e ‘:l)’al.v_1_elof’ the goods
\nfor the   The assessment
\n lhe__p_resent case and the
\na\u00a7s;sessr7lr\u00a3er1.iVorders\u00abhad__a.lready been passed. It is
\nonly when  returned, me question (U.\n<\/p>\n
refiu1d’—-.aro.sel We therefore, unable to accept<\/p>\n
 cor1i’em:ior1 S.ri.Rauindrer1 Narain rhai the<\/p>\n
V” apiplealsgare rvlalrllairlalale under clause {B} of the<\/p>\n
 ” “3..’\u00a7\u00a3;–.oj’ the Act and the appeals are liable to<\/p>\n
  ”\n<\/p>\n
  DIVISION BENCH OF THIS COURT IN THE<\/p>\n
1;\n<\/p>\n
1\/’<\/p>\n
36<\/span><\/p>\n
U01 REPORTED IN 1998 (100) BELT [Keir] in1’c%1*1)1j(.:i.i_’::1g;
\n35 L ofihe Act. held as under :’ b b b V M<\/p>\n
“From the reading Qf t;?:\u00e9”‘ai:o;_,\u00bb\u00a2;\n<\/p>\n
contained in. Section 35L of m;>.\u00abAc’t_;c  :
\nto as that even. gfone of (.Fcte..gLtesVifio_ris raiseci
\nthe Tribunal for deierrniaa\ufb01orl reIate._Vi_o”Ara’ie
\nduty of excise onto thee-~vo..l’a<a"'Qf' goocisvv;.!brV\u00a7U1e
\npurposes of assess-x1.9i5er_1At,'\u00ab._then.tf'1;efre'medy by way
\nof appeal against {be the  can be
\noniy b\u00a2Ef"Q7'\u00a3\/"i:.h'('.  LjOVAL'Ir;i'::~–(;xf1.(3l'V\u00a2Si'vLC}1 question
\ncarmo_I_'    ._ijhe–._Aiiuisofgbjurisdiciion of
\nthe High   'i'r'i  the specific bar
\n _  Jiobd\ufb02vof' the Act which
\ns;}ecf}"'\u00a3cai\u00a3y:V' on the said questions
\nper(,a:'m'r1g to   'duty and value of goods<\/p>\n
.~i1e\u00a3I;her".aI2V1;  can be made by the Trfbuzlal<\/p>\n
w'.~*1or.ca11. be caliedjor by the High Court"<\/p>\n
 "'\u00a7'1A1e Sup1_'\u00e9n1e Cm]:-1' had an 0CCE1SH)1'1 to intm-prct the said<\/p>\n
  35G{1} and 35i,.{b} of the AC1: are in<\/p>\n
pe11A'a-r_nai_e1'iaVbA \ufb01\ufb01riih Se<:li(m 129K) and 13013 of the Customs AC1…<\/p>\n
L<\/p>\n
'x<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
37<\/span><\/p>\n
Semicm 1.291) and 130K in 3 mmlber of de(:isi()ns,_l’}{()’t\u00a7Je\\re1′.<\/p>\n
ihough not. in an ide1’1ti(:al \u00a7I’]Ell’,l.\u20ac’}’. but almost near  V’<\/p>\n
matter, interpreting ihe powers of ll:1eA”A1Jpel1i::1te_.Ti’ri’b’i;11la’l–,fwith<\/p>\n
reference to the jurisdiction of 21 speci’e,1 Bench and *Ei,v1″l’.C)i’Q.l.l’i’lvEli1′”:’}.7_<\/p>\n
Bench, the Supreme Court head oc\u00e9as_ionV to \u00e9a\ufb01sieer the<\/p>\n
very same words used inlooth the—-sle”e–tionps in  of NAVIN
\nCHEMICALS MFG. 82.  t}t:i,..,frsi.VcoLLEcToR op
\nCUSTOMS reported in”   SC under the<\/p>\n
Customs Act_..–T1ae Apeix C0u_ri.Vhe1;;i  under:<\/p>\n
 H    ore, relates to the
\nmearilr1_gl  to the expression
\n‘cieliern14irzav(‘io12_o;'”.:ar1.z;’_.qiLeslion having a relation to
\ngrhe rate of Vdzlty  easloms or to the value of {he<\/p>\n
lfjoaidsjor purposes ofassessnieni’. It seems to as
\n ..1l1aVi”ih>e_ lfceii; lies in (she words for the purpose of
\n therein. Where the appeal involves the<\/p>\n
A deieI’rn:i’iir,ai,ior1 of any question ihai has a relation to
\ni:’~iel”;ral’e of customs duty for the purposes of<\/p>\n
A’ auasslessmeni that appeal must be head by a Special
\n Bencli. Simi.lariy, where the appeal involves the<\/p>\n
aieler’minal.ic)n o\/”any qu.est’ion rhaz’: has a relation to<\/p>\n
39<\/span><\/p>\n
of goods for the purpose of assessment’  <\/p>\n
iixplanation thereto provides a definition Q{‘::’t jjorf” <\/p>\n
the purposes of this su.l3\u00bbseCt.io71’,W The Efxpianation ‘<\/p>\n
says that the expression _ineti’ide1s*.__: ‘t;he,_<\/p>\n
determination of a qiiestion relat;ing_ to the rate <\/p>\n
duty. to the value of  for the piirpos\u00bbes–v <\/p>\n
assessment; to the classi]’icatio_n goods_tun:dergt’he
\nTariff and whether: or jtqyglp’-eotwerediibg an
\nexemption nol1ftcation;.”and value of
\ngoods jor thepiirp’oses:fof””\ufb01sessment should be
\nenhancec_t i_j(:di;.\u00a2e\u00e9t. “hai}i:1g”–xregaird to certain
\nmat’t’er5s thatj said-:pro%b:ides for. Although
\ntl1ist~~veviE\u00e9Eplanatiori   slg nleonfines the said
\nde\/’inition”qf.t;h4e~isaidexpression to subsection (5)
\nOfAS\u00a2Ci”t’QT1′  that the expression<\/p>\n
iised  the other iparts of t.he said Act’ should be<\/p>\n
.  interpret.ed’ =..similc-;rly. The statutory definition<\/p>\n
ae’eords,_with the meaning we have given to the<\/p>\n
‘Vlsaidie\u00a7+\u00e9pr1’>ssion above. Questions relating to the<\/p>\n
“‘lirafe’.V–}:;ffVduty and to the value of goods for<\/p>\n
 purposes of assessment. are questions that<\/p>\n
sqiiarely fall within the meaning of the said<\/p>\n
“expression. A dispute as to the class1_’ficatr’on of<\/p>\n
goods and as to whether or not they are covered by<\/p>\n
an exemption r’1ott]”ieati.or’1 relates d.i.reet.ly and<\/p>\n
~ “value of the goods.”\n<\/p>\n
40<\/span><\/p>\n
pTO)Cit71Cll\u20acl._lj to the rate of duty applicable  <\/p>\n
for purposes of assessment’- Wheiher the va~l’:_1e of ‘7’<\/p>\n
goodsfor purposes ofassessmeni is reqi:i.red:”loVb-e’<\/p>\n
increased or decreased is a qiiestion \u00abthat .;i’el’c’1i;e_sV  V’
\ndirectly and proximately to the “‘ualu_e”o]’ g>oodsjor~ <\/p>\n
purposes of ClSS\u20acSSTT1\u20acr1l.”‘Tl1’\u20ac stat-3__.it.’org dejfi:\ufb01i’i!Vioi1 <\/p>\n
of the said. expression irldicaitees t,hati'”   toebe
\nread to limit his applicalio.n.”‘i:o.. wl1.ere~u.,.f’r_>r:..l’l1e
\npurposes of assess”mer1t..’:qi.l;estilo*rils iarise directly
\nand proximatjely as to._the_rd__te:ofthe value<\/p>\n
of the goojdsft. _f —\n<\/p>\n
12. \u00bbAtT’par\u00e9ij;12ll”fi.1ey ‘C–onC1ude’d~a~s under:<\/p>\n
 “test for the purposes of<\/p>\n
clet’eri’t1iriii1glwhet’rier’or not an appeal should be<\/p>\n
heard  lSpeci’ol. licerich of CEGAT. whether or
\nF102;;-.e.:c1 re ‘erelrice*–*E3y CEGAT lies to the High Court
\n __and'<u':h,eiher or not an appeal lies directly to the
\n from a decision of CEGAT: does the<\/p>\n
 qi.iestioi:.i requires determination have a direct: and<\/p>\n
.~:roJ:jimat;e relation, for the purposes of assessment,<\/p>\n
' ' to the rate of duty applicable to the goods or to the<\/p>\n
41<\/span><\/p>\n
34. in the case of COMMISSIONER or <\/p>\n
CHENNAI VS. JAYATHI KRISHNA AND:   –\n<\/p>\n
REPORTED IN 20000 19) ELT 4(sc;,~~ -the qtigstitatt ‘i.dI”i\\!oviVe’~’i d”
\nwas whether the assessee is liable to <\/p>\n
61(2) of the Customs Act.  theh”1mposittion:._:o’fwinterest”..i’<\/p>\n
under the aforesaid provisiona….xijas_  before the
\nTribunal, the Tribunal  having been
\nmade applicab1e’_toV__ t’he:”go’odfs  the question of
\npayment of   Agaisnt the said
\norder,  to the Supreme Court<\/p>\n
under Secti’on  which came to be dismissed.<\/p>\n
 In ‘t.h’e..t::aS\u20ac \ufb01r COMMISSIONER or’ CUSTOMS (EX),<\/p>\n
  Nrcco BATTERIES LIMITED, REPORTED IN<\/p>\n
 (SC), the benefit of exemption notification<\/p>\n
was.\u00b0g\u00a7ranted”‘to earlier four consignments and at the stage of<\/p>\n
it it ‘  .i,’\u00a5cie.arance.of the fifth consignment, the said bene\ufb01t was denied
\n_d  i:_ni:ier the orders of the superior officer w.itho’ut assigning<\/p>\n
it  “reasons. The Tribunal found fauit with the said action and<\/p>\n
‘   Ctgstioms.\n<\/p>\n
42<\/span><\/p>\n
extended the benefit to the fifth eorlsigiiriient also.W Ag,g1*ir:Etye’d<\/p>\n
by the said order of the Tribunal, the revenue’lpdrderreddd  <\/p>\n
appeal to the Supreme Court under Seetion.  Aet\ufb01; <\/p>\n
36. In the ease of COMMISSIQNER 014* e:rrs14\u00a7;)1s2ts,  ,<\/p>\n
NEW DELHI VS. PUNJAB   ‘rN1$\u00a7IsTR1Es,
\nREPORTED IN 2oo1(13;\u00a7\u00a7jja;;LT yarreggatien against
\nthe assessee was that  the export;\n<\/p>\n
obligation wereid  as he used the
\nmaterial of \u00a7’i;;1’ts:_i}ig3_.\u00a7”‘:7  “one required in the
\nrr1a1*1L1fa<:y::t't1;~r\u00a2  charge was held to be
\nproved on the'  report. of t.he expert and therefore<\/p>\n
the goods were _eoi1fi.sea'\u00a3;ed':: The said order was Challenged by<\/p>\n
d it "the a.s:ses'aee~vt.}V3et'ore'Vti'te'V"1"rib'ur1a1. The Tribunal set aside the<\/p>\n
s__a'id_orade'r_.y dr'~4ggi'ieyed by the same, the revenue preferred an<\/p>\n
 ur_1de:iiV_AC\u00a73ec:t.ior1 130E of the Act before the Supreme<\/p>\n
'Court and the Supreme Court set aside the order of the<\/p>\n
  "\u00ab."1':'i:b1i'1~\u00ab1aI and restored the order of the Commissioner of<\/p>\n
'i<\/p>\n
-‘t5-\/.\/<\/p>\n
\/”‘<\/p>\n
43<\/span><\/p>\n
37. In the Case of JINDAL DYE 1NT,r;_Rzi;;t*\u00a7.i31,l1rE<\/p>\n
LIMITED vs. COLELCTOR OF cUsr1’o-M_:”s,, ;.vzjairivii?2$1Il”\u00bb<\/p>\n
REPORTED IN 2006(197) 1:1;.T 4f71″[s–c), 5i,he_,V4l*fr’:I:4lhe;.1i1.ligdl’<\/p>\n
upheld the order of the exuthorities 2-thd tiel’r1iedl’t}_1Ve-.(:XCm;j’tiOlf1s.._<\/p>\n
The assessee preferred an aplpe_\u00e9i’iv..Vt111de’:” ._S\u20ac:\u20ac3l.iVOl_’1  bf the”<\/p>\n
Act to the Supreme Court. “.\u00a3’l’ie…S:i’ip1*e\u00bbn1e Cdt1–r:t_set’ aside the
\nOrder of the Tribunal anti’ ‘helct tllie,?a1\u00bbelsesSee is entitled to<\/p>\n
the benefit of exe1_n–pvt.i011,A””  —\n<\/p>\n
38. 1111 zn’~v:.}1\u00e9’1’1ease-\u00bb–:\u00a7f._” COMMISSIONER or CUSTOMS.<\/p>\n
NEW NELHI VS.’ ‘ff-\u00bb ‘ INTERNATIONAL LIMITED<\/p>\n
REPORTEEIN {2\u00a2ii}f7f2l.1’:3j};LT 5o3(sc). the question involved<\/p>\n
 was .?.xi]1eti;e1* the ‘a.ssessee has imported in violation of the Exim<\/p>\n
 Policy .ai1(J_ –ee’nseqL1e11tly liable to pay cust10r11s duty. The<\/p>\n
‘f1?ih’t1_I;ial”  ‘~tl”1}:1\u20ac, there is violat.i0r1 of Exim Policy. In an<\/p>\n
V _ appeal prei’er1’ed against the order of the Tribunal under<\/p>\n
,:lSer:tt.eiQ11V”l..’3\u00bbOE 01’ the Act, the Supreme Court reversed the<\/p>\n
 -v–‘\u00a7elzit,i11g Para l56[A) of the I:3xi.m I-’01iey 1992437 and t’here1’0re,<\/p>\n
  l’i’:1tl’ing;>; of the Tribunal by holding t:112tt assessee is guilty of<\/p>\n
46<\/span><\/p>\n
40. In the Case of COMMISSIONER OF c\ufb01sifq\ufb01zs,<\/p>\n
NEW DELHI VS. SONY INDIA LIMITED, REPORTED f,’\u00b01;.~i <\/p>\n
20031231 )ELT 335 (so), the que;sm:r1\u00bb-mmivegiy .\u00a3x.–=h\u00a21-.r1x.–.;~’ ”<\/p>\n
the assessee had Committed E-1’e.=jeh 0f’– _Exi.m <\/p>\n
Uitimately. the ‘I’ribu.na1 held  is HQ of”:Exin1~h<\/p>\n
Policy and e0r1seqL1e11i1y,,. ‘no d\u00a71L3rVyOvaS”–paid.’    revenue
\naggrieved by the said  231′} appeal to the
\nSupreme Court uh;d_e1′ se;+,eo:$”: }30_1\u00a73._0f’.VLh.ej The Supreme<\/p>\n
Court Ltpheleuthe  <\/p>\n
coNcLtISiON.. if”. _ K :7;\n<\/p>\n
 Q \u00ab”1’he1*eVVi’o::’:e.,V_fhe’2e2s;i:2;’essi0n ‘rate’ is often used in the<\/p>\n
:~_:ense of a sE.ayndaV1’d-_0i’._(rhe.a’SL1re. ‘Rate’ generally is an impost.<\/p>\n
 usL1a\u00a7}y for CL11*r’e_nt 01f recurrent expenditure. spread over a<\/p>\n
 r.1is\u00ab{..1’_ict_0′:.’. Q{.I’1.e1′ local area and is distinct from an amount<\/p>\n
“1;.aya;;1e’*v.f’o.;~_  done upon or in respect of pa1’t’1eu1ar<\/p>\n
p1*efnise$…  is defined by Webster to be the price or<\/p>\n
.  ]a”.mQ1.111t.'”s\u00e9fated or fixed for anything. The word ‘rate’ ineiudes<\/p>\n
‘-aVr1y_At:’o1}. due. reni. 1’a1e or charge. It means the scale or<\/p>\n
47<\/span><\/p>\n
amount of any other charges. The word ‘rate’ iswuys-ecl’~t.Vvith<\/p>\n
reference both to 21 percelitage or proportion of-t>:1lxes’;–. E;<\/p>\n
valuation of property. “Rate’ is L1S\u00a7’.d._i_I1 a1i”ACt’-:decla.ring .\/_tl’1′;’\u00ab;*ri;. <\/p>\n
the Legislative Assembly shall provide   \u00e9i”nii.il’orni::sind ‘<\/p>\n
equal rate of taxation ancl”‘–~.\u00a7tsses-snient.
\npercentage of fixation. ss useclin”eoxineetioltyyith ‘taxation’ and
\nto the valuation of  in oonneetion with
\n.gLSsessment’. Ittis a  estate or setting
\ndown how.  \u00bb\u00a2;;hsi1*ged With. to any tax.\n<\/p>\n
By the  21 relation between the
\ntaxable  tarxpclharged is intended. but the
\nrelation need nature of proportion of fraction. The<\/p>\n
Explanation t;:)iVv”st.\ufb02:\u00ab~seotion {5} of Section 35E of the<\/p>\n
  Epxoisev” hhhhh  the expression includes the<\/p>\n
   21 question relating to the rate of duty. to the<\/p>\n
Value  for the purposes of assessment: to the<\/p>\n
 classivfieation of goods under the Taiiff and whether or not they<\/p>\n
 covered by an exemption notification; and whether the<\/p>\n
Value of goods for the purposes of assessment should be<\/p>\n
ex’<\/p>\n
phrase ‘rate 01′ tax’ does not mean fraction of tax payable<\/p>\n
because what is the tax payable i.e.. fraction payab1e_4ts_deC:i._ded<\/p>\n
by the Eegislature. Once that is prescribed by the<\/p>\n
the Act, the Court cannot sit in jL1dgthe11t anti”a.tt:e1f  moctiiufyu<\/p>\n
the said rate of tax. The Court  110-.j1.ti3tstijCti.dr1 t’0″g0 =i:j_t.:o<\/p>\n
the Correctness or othenvise Oi’-tj_11e 1’at:e ‘Of ta}:*’fJ:ty.etb1e tn Vt;he’*.<\/p>\n
sense the rate prescribed by thue=._1hegts1at’11re\u00ab_.At’Therefore, the
\nargument that the rate ‘o:[_”t’.ax rheettls the rate at which tax
\nis payable or a fraction is t1_:i’s:uVstaf’i1’tVa.b’1’e. — V  .. <\/p>\n
 ._ Bt”e:;;{:.113z_\u00bbathe'<vfe1'i{)_\\x*iIig disputes do not fall within
\nthe jL11"iSC1'i(1f,i'O1'1   tmder Section 35(g) of the Act:~<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
\u00e9gjtcii  Dis;:J.1e;teVret\u00a2:tin_q t" H13 duty Qf e'-'case payable on
\n ,CU1_tj g:):)ds… *<\/p>\n
  –._value Q!” the goods for the purposes of<\/p>\n
” ‘V asis-essntentz.\n<\/p>\n
 (c)v\\.~ ~  dispute as to the clasS;’f1’ca\u00a3:’1’0n Q1′ goods.<\/p>\n
(‘cit ” Whether those goods are covered by an exemption.
\n:’1oi1ft’e:tat:ion or not.\n<\/p>\n
50<\/span><\/p>\n
(e) Wheiher the va.iu.e of goods for the piirpo\u00e9es of
\nassessment is required to be inc;*’.eased or
\ndecreased.  * ” ”\n<\/p>\n
(I? ‘1’ he question Qf whether a.n.y good;”areuexcisrxbieu <\/p>\n
goods or not.\n<\/p>\n
Lg} Whether a process is iforni:i_h.i’gfaefr:rii1g. profjenes1s’vi.or
\nnot. so as to aiiracf; ievy Qfexcfse di1iy..A ‘ ‘ ‘ <\/p>\n
{h} Whether a }JaFE’fCLiZd=i}V”‘gOOd\u00a7 ~._fCiE{–V’ iuiihin which
\nheading, s__ub~headir.1qa._ or; t:aryj’7iV_ item or the<\/p>\n
descriptiorlvojgioods as ITi1:’I1ifOH\u20acd in eoliumn No.3 of<\/p>\n
the Cer1t.ralE’Xeisre ‘Fl\n<\/p>\n
43. F1’or},1″the a!ToV1″VeS’aii\u00a5cl  is Clear that an<\/p>\n
order \u00a7)eiiSseCiI”j; by*:1\u00a7:.:he”*– Appeilatei-‘ifribunai relating to the
\ndeierxtliiaatioxl’ M  hhaving relation to the rate of<\/p>\n
duty of  .01:io th’enli?a1LIe of goods for the pulposes of<\/p>\n
 &_ assve\u00e9sarnelzi. lies “[‘C.1,v1:1’\u00a7”SL1p1’\u20ac111\u20ac Court under Section 35L(b} of<\/p>\n
  to the High Court u.ndE:1’ Section .’35[G].<\/p>\n
 ‘i”He.ii1ieI1ti01] behind this bifL11*c.ai:i()11 of jilrisdiciion<\/p>\n
bef;\\”rv.ee13.__”i.i19\u00abf\ufb01pex Court. and the High Court seems to be that<\/p>\n
h  “‘;’11()o:”e ()t’i.en. E11211} not, any decision on these aforesaid alsspeeis<\/p>\n
‘:’1o’.:. only affects the interest of the manuf21eEu1’e1’s who are<\/p>\n
2<\/span>
\n1 5<\/p>\n
52<\/span><\/p>\n
45. In so far as the Conteiition that once the
\ndeclared by the Apex Couri, in the schedule there: .
\nrriention of the item. the duty payablepthe
\nand interpreting those entries while
\nlaid down the law, the qL1est.i0hQillagetirid  ;
\nthe said dispute would not   irifirespect of
\nCases which are already   and pending for<\/p>\n
years. there is no_’1*1ecessiity’  l\ufb01tiex Court’: even in<\/p>\n
such 1’I1’c1ll\u20ac1:’_s.;   lithe: law declared by the<\/p>\n
Apex     under Article 141 of I
\nthe  cljolhot see any merit in the said
\ncomentiotill It   that no one has 8. right of
\n  Right. 3}, eppeal is El erer3.t’ure of a statute.
\n   appeal has to be worked out under a
\n  parameters prescribed expressly under the
\nSt\u00e9;tL1t,e’.” ‘1fi”i1:ilcie1’ E1 statute appeal is provided and then in some
\n‘V r.o7eit.t;e1’:3:t.l1e jurisdiction of one Appellate Court. is ousted and
\nl “‘V_l,l’iC,~”1″”;’\u00bbE3_1f11E’. is eonferreci in yet anotlier Appellate Court, the party\n<\/p>\n
–7lwho wei11t.s to ex.e1’c.isae the right of appeal can only exercise the<\/p>\n
it\/” i<\/p>\n
.. ,.  .,.V..,,.w\u00bbaH\u00bb;.v;\/\u00bbWw\u00bbw\u00bbMmw&%&%5f\ufb015 <\/p>\n
C’ . o’eCr.ided<\/p>\n
53<\/span><\/p>\n
same in 2-1eoorc.iaii(‘e with the stiatuie. The question ’10i”‘:1o’p.1yvi.\u00a2rig<\/p>\n
the law of the land with referen(:<:r to the decrisiti-its 1'end'e'i"<;d""i3y"\u00bb
\nthe Apex Court'. or the entries in the sCh_ectt.1\u00a7.e wot};-id 11VVovt._:;:1ri'-se. '
\nThe question is. an aggrieved pe1'son shottilcitt'a[\u00a7p.roa:cii_C'wh'ieii<\/p>\n
Court. Once that forum is speL\u00a7i_fi"ee1 'L'lHd.\u20acl'VU1\u20ac.  is only C<\/p>\n
that: forum which can ent',ertai1iV__t__he\u00bb.sppeai…'inC.t.hat_iuie\\v oi' the
\nmatter, either the p\u20ac11dei"i..(.ijf_Qi';–_th~i\u20ac\u00a7 this Court I01\u00bb
\nConsiderable time. or finvoivect in these
\nappeals are   of the Apex
\nCourt woulci   niaintaiiiabie, if it is not
\nmaiiitziiiiabie   'I'he1*efore, we do not see
\nany stibstteirioe in  <\/p>\n
A  C    learned counsel for the Revenue relied upon<\/p>\n
the"'j.iidgniez.:t'. 'otvtthis Court in the ease of Coinmissioner of<\/p>\n
Central E'X7ci:~3'e W vs — M\/s.I-'ushpad(-rep Erilterprises decided on<\/p>\n
 in"'.CI*3A 17\/2007 and contended that this court: has<\/p>\n
the Case on merits as if it: has jui'isdiCt.io1i<\/p>\n
is nrsiwithstz11'1ding the ob_jeetion taken by the assessee that SE.E('h<\/p>\n
!<\/p>\n
it .\n<\/p>\n
it\/’<\/p>\n
54<\/span><\/p>\n
an appeal i.s not maihtaihable 11\/ s.35(} of the <\/p>\n
perusal of the said order discloses that the <\/p>\n
jurisdiction was raised in para 2 of”t;”r’ie\u00a20rdeif,.. KThelivearr\u00a3ed if it<\/p>\n
Judge of this Court has observed as <\/p>\n
“When the matter ti;as”itaken’—-:;_,f)’
\nthe learned counsei for the—respdiidient llic1s.rais\u00a7ed a
\npreliminary objecti})nA  uiith ” to the
\nmaintainability of the  l9y.”stdtii_’igl.lil1at even if
\nthe ques.tic\u00e9ii  [to j,@f:e:t;\u00e9i\u00e9i”_:r:jie activity Qf the
\nrespo1jdent–cis_is*essee_&_isjieid to   rnanufaciuring<\/p>\n
activit:y..V.Ve:3e:’iV then rate  duty applicable for<\/p>\n
s’:.,ich__ aA__0.ctivity has to be decided
\nor1lIgu”Co’urt in view of the express
\nprovistahsv  -_Sectionll~*bi’35G r\/w. Section 351, of the
\n, Ceritrai  Act 2
\n   is notfdisputed by the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
 _Rew\/5lli:mii\u00a7~_,;\u00a3;hat’; .though such a Contention raised by the assessee<\/p>\n
was_llli9ecoi’ded_tAi::as set out above, the learned Judge did not<\/p>\n
lxudecide question of maintainability at ali. Without deciding<\/p>\n
fithel jurisdictional aspect the case was ‘decided on iiierits as if<\/p>\n
55<\/span><\/p>\n
they have got jurisdiction. Therefore, the learned <\/p>\n
the Revenue submits that the said judgment is <\/p>\n
the proposition that such an appeal” i-s.yn1aintai”nab1eaf:s by ‘<\/p>\n
implication this Court in the said  has_Th–e.ld.. <\/p>\n
issue against the assessee. V  are.”afraid~-,th’2:t”*such an<\/p>\n
inierence is not possible When\ufb02av.juri’sdict.ion.al giuestion is
\nraised before a court   settled law that
\nsuch authority  whether it has
\njurisdiction or  is before it. Unless
\na  the question of such
\nan order  deciding the question of
\njurisdiction”Wotaldneitheroperate as a binding precedent or by
\n in1p1i.r.iat:io1i thejpuifisdictional issue has been held against
\n  if such construction is to be placed, it is
\n  said assessee is concerned and it is open<\/p>\n
_ for the assessee to approach the superior court contending<\/p>\n
,:lirstly that, the court which passed the order has no<\/p>\n
  jti_risdict.ion and in which event. the Appellate Authority has to<\/p>\n
 -decide whether the court has jurisdiction to pass order or not.<\/p>\n
12\/<\/p>\n
Therefore, the said jtidgziieiit is of no assistance
\ncont1’ove1’sy in this case. i i i V i
\nON FACTS<\/p>\n
48. The assessee COIiteii’d..s ‘Eh’OA.t1:’:%}”1  goods
\nare manufactured, it is not n1Vari:{e’t.abiepA \\.m1:e_refore, they are
\nconsuming the said for the purpose of
\nmanufacturing steam. IF vso:’.vinanut’actui’ed, they
\nare produc.in\u00a7,:  eteictricity so produced is
\nused  which again makes it
\nnot  .have aiso contended because the
\nfina} product  them irvhouse t.he Notification<\/p>\n
No.\u20acg7;’ 1995.’ grants comptete exemption from the payment of<\/p>\n
 excise ~__It is  contention of the Revenue that a portion<\/p>\n
  otftiie “pi”od.tict. is used for construction activity, for \ufb01ghting<\/p>\n
at -.r_esidc=~nt’ifa\u00a3. Iayout and soid to HGIL 3 public sector<\/p>\n
 undert’va_t?iir1g and to that extent the assessee is 11211316 to pay<\/p>\n
 duty. i’t\/,-\/ \u00bb\u00bb\u00bb\u00bb  ”\n<\/p>\n
57<\/span><\/p>\n
49. l.e211’ned counsel for the Reventie relying fti’p():”1″1V the<\/p>\n
decision in COMMISSIONER OF C.EX.    t-\n<\/p>\n
CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPN. LT,ir;;ii\u00bbrepert:eet’V”4iii7;2oo%i(2 1’1 )9′ ”<\/p>\n
ELT 193150) where it is held the e1etS’ii’iei_t.y” i;eiie.i~_;ti,e’ei Reg<\/p>\n
which was actively consumecl b)~’._llli.\u00a7 Cor.po1’ati0ii.Vwas’*i1Qt~liable. . 9′<\/p>\n
to duty to t:ha.t extent. D\u00a7,’.I.11’r11’1ClVA}t1.1.’rVV1:d-2*.’i’I1_vth\u20ac.t3ll.Ql\u00a7{‘AQaitlse notice
\ndated 17.08.1999 fails.  a part of the
\nelectrieit.y produeedV__lfr0r:nl”  during the
\nperiod Augtlei to  ltiomthat extent alone the
\n  of duty. This requires
\nf\u20acCa.lCL1:l,?_3’tl.lC}1’l.A–\u00a30’ that extent alone the matter is
\nbeing    authority for fresh<\/p>\n
Cl\u20ac[\u20acF\u00a7’t1’1lI}’c1tl0}flV’0Alf tl1\u20ac dtit Erable ‘.3’ the ztssessee for the
\n..   13 y<\/p>\n
   1998 to January 1999. Relying on the said<\/p>\n
 v..\u00a5\u00a7ts–“‘co11te11ded. to the extent. the final product. is<\/p>\n
used for_feonst.i’L1et,io11 activity and not a residentiztl layout. and<\/p>\n
 to”i-alnother public. sector ttndertziking. the duty payable<\/p>\n
*r;a1’:no1. be disputed and that question can be gone into by the<\/p>\n
   Court.\n<\/p>\n
58<\/span><\/p>\n
50. It was also contended that the Apex  ilie<\/p>\n
ease of COMMISSIONER, C.EX. Vs.    <\/p>\n
FERTILIZERS co. LTD. reported in’ 2’oo9(24o} 1S617=(s’CI V<\/p>\n
held Where they’ were dealing with llowl’-Siilphliiiiilleavy–Silo:ei:_u<\/p>\n
ILSHS) which is the impugned  in l.ll1.i.’.3V  <\/p>\n
was a case where the  il1e’-assessee was
\nassailed. Aggrieved by  preferred an
\nappeal before   ilvere referred to a
\nlarger Bench.   held that credit
\nwas   Aggrieved by the said
\norder, tlhe   appeal to The Apex Court”:\n<\/p>\n
under Sectio;1ll35Il{‘b_)l’ol”  in which the Apex Court held<\/p>\n
 that _i_{ll1e LCENVVA”-.lT_Vllo’r duty paid on individual Cases in the<\/p>\n
 e:o’f._exempi.ed final products is not liable. Sub–1’ule<\/p>\n
{“‘i]_ Viigis ap:;i,:_ea.i’_-in’ respect of goods used as fuel and on such<\/p>\n
V _ 21ppl’ie2}ii.c)’Ii. -the Credii will not be permissible on such quantity<\/p>\n
 5:1 fiiel which is used in the m.anufaci.u:~e of exempted goods.<\/p>\n
 _ l~le’1*e agaiiii when the ‘l’ribimal held l.l’\u00a3\u20ac assessee is eiitiiled to<\/p>\n
   Ci?,l\\EVA’I’ c1’edit., which in S1,IbSl,E-111(‘.\u20ac? amoLm'{S to saying the<\/p>\n
59<\/span><\/p>\n
impugned goods is not excisable and no duty “-..l\u00b0e–\\V5’i’aJ.ble<\/p>\n
against. such an order. the appea} is pi-eferi-ed  theT’R’eve.n’uev.<\/p>\n
under Section 35L[b} to the Apex Courft and”no’t..’:t.o’.Vtl1’_eeVHigh ‘ . <\/p>\n
Court. Therefore. the said judginent iIist:e:ad of s1.i’p;)o17tii1\u00a7’=ti.he<\/p>\n
case of the Revenue supports ‘the-ease oftlie\n<\/p>\n
51. All these questions Telate to determination of rate<\/p>\n
of duty payable, the ‘v~a1ueAh’ of  mantifaetured and
\nentitlement of exemption  They have to be<\/p>\n
decided by the~’Af_se;\u00a7’Cot1._rt ti:-V.a’n”ai5′;’i-ealvoigfeferred under Section<\/p>\n
35L{b)’.of _1;he_’the High Court in an appeal<\/p>\n
preferred undser’S.ee’tion:_43.5\ufb01{G} of the Act. The learned counsel<\/p>\n
for the assesseeis jti-stiiied in contending that this appeal<\/p>\n
.\u00b0’Apre’fe1:.red’A..the  challenging the order passed by the<\/p>\n
 holding that the impugned goods are not<\/p>\n
extttsable  ‘accordingly. setting aside the Eevy of duty and the<\/p>\n
W,deIna1’idi~iotice issued by the department is not maintainable<\/p>\n
 the Iiigli Court.\n<\/p>\n
60<\/span><\/p>\n
52. Therefore, we are of the considered \u00a7.).}’_’)”i}’_} E’u()”Z.:1″‘,.1′}’i\u00ab?3.t<\/p>\n
the present appeal preferred under Section 35[C;\u00a7]__”0f <\/p>\n
not nlaintamabie before this C0L:;rt’\u00a7'”The”,ap.pe21l’._is’~13; be V<\/p>\n
preferred to the Supreme Court m\ufb01vdper–.See1:ier1__A3*5L(.b)”<\/p>\n
Act. Accordingly, the appeai is d._iemisse5. No  <\/p>\n
 L  sax:\n<\/p>\n
1s%WTUDGE<\/p>\n
re  ksp  fuj k<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & … on 1 September, 2010 Author: N.Kumar And H.S.Kempanna IN THE HIGH COURT 01+” KARNATAKA AT BgT:~:.Q;\u00a7.ig;j:;_\ufb01: DATED THIS THE .1 8′? DAY OF sEp’rEMf3\ufb01;.R., J’ PRESENT _ _ THE HOITBLE MR.VJUS’fICE*.V_i\\I.KIfi\\riA’R ‘ ‘ ~~ THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTIC \u00a7E H;S__.KEMPAN’NA BETWEEN: THE […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-238417","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & ... on 1 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & ... on 1 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-06T18:07:31+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=\"50 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\\\/S Mangalore Refineries & … on 1 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-06T18:07:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":10091,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010\",\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\\\/S Mangalore Refineries & ... on 1 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-06T18:07:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\\\/S Mangalore Refineries & … on 1 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & ... on 1 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & ... on 1 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-06T18:07:31+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":"50 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & … on 1 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-06T18:07:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010"},"wordCount":10091,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010","name":"The Commissioner Of Central ... vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & ... on 1 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-06T18:07:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-central-vs-ms-mangalore-refineries-on-1-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Commissioner Of Central … vs M\/S Mangalore Refineries & … on 1 September, 2010"}]},{"@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\/238417","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=238417"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238417\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=238417"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=238417"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=238417"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}