Skip to content


Collector of C. Ex., Pune Vs. Paranjape Metal Shaper (P) Ltd. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation
SubjectExcise
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in2003(154)ELT348(SC); 2003(10)SCALE47; (2003)9SCC210
AppellantCollector of C. Ex., Pune
RespondentParanjape Metal Shaper (P) Ltd.
Appellant Advocate Raju Ramachandran, Sr. Adv.,; K.C. Kaushik,; Rajiv Nanda
Respondent Advocate Joseph Vellapally, Sr. Adv., ; T. Vellapally, ; Ramesh Singh
DispositionAppeals dismissed
Excerpt:
excise - central excise act - section 2, 3 - tribunal sand if used for captive consumption, then no duty would be levied, but if it is sold then duty would be payable - decision of tribunal covered by a notification - appeal dismissed - order1. these appeals are against the order dated 22nd august, 1997 passed by the customs, excise and gold (control) appellate tribunal (cegat). the question was whether sand, to which a quoting of resin is applied, becomes a manufactured item. the tribunal has held that if it is used for captive consumption then no duty would be payable but that if it is soldthen duty would be payable. we find that the decision of the tribunal is covered by notification no. 217/86-ce., dated 2nd april, 1986 which exempts sand used in the manufacture of casting provided it is used for captive consumption. we, therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned judgment. we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. appeals are accordingly dismissed. 2. no order as to costs.
Judgment:
ORDER

1. These appeals are against the order dated 22nd August, 1997 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT). The question was whether sand, to which a quoting of resin is applied, becomes a manufactured item. The Tribunal has held that if it is used for captive consumption then no duty would be payable but that if it is soldthen duty would be payable. We find that the decision of the Tribunal is covered by Notification No. 217/86-CE., dated 2nd April, 1986 which exempts sand used in the manufacture of casting provided it is used for captive consumption. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned judgment. We see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Appeals are accordingly dismissed.

2. No order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //