Karnataka Electricity Board Vs. Collector of C. Ex. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
1. the learned counsel, mr. sridhar, argued hvaliantly and with great spirit, but this dispute is not new and is already settled. he argued that the rcc poles were manufactured by different units - each licensed independently of the others. the present unit is licensed in the name of the executive engineer of that unit. [in the appeal they speak of 2 units - one at devangere and another at chitradurga - of which only one is in the jurisdiction of this assistant collector]. each unit must be taken separately. it is not correct to take the total of all the units in the state. but this does not take into account the fact that licensing focuses on the actual producing division or sub-division. if the licence was in favour of the engineer, that was because he was the applicant: the state government could have been licensed if it had applied. the argument loses sight of another fact - the poles are not produced for the engineer in charge but are produced for the state government to be used anywhere such government desires. the poles can even be sent for use outside the state. but that use is not to be determined by the engineer of the unit in which the poles are produced but by the needs of the state electricity authorities. the learned counsel perhaps does not know that there are firms who have factories in different parts of india; each factory licensed independently of the other. but when a notification like 105/80-c.e., is to be applied, the productions of all the factories are totalled: this is what the assistant collector has done in this case, and he was quite right. and the result here is that the total exceeds the modificatory limits.2. the learned counsel said that the poles are not sold. but this does not prevent them from selling them, if they find a customer as they well may. however, not selling a good does not make it non-excisable.there is no law for this. if it is excisable, it must pay.3. the poles are planted in the earth, became immovable property, and hence not excisable, declared the learned counsel. first, they are made and became excisable; only later they are transported to the site and fixed to the ground. second, the central excise law does not say that excisable goods is not excisable if it is fixed to the earth.weighbridges, in fact, unlike these poles are, so to speak, born in the earth or grow out of the earth. they are completed only when all components and parts have been fixed to the earth or to other parts fixed to the earth. they are items decreed by law to suffer excise duty; and so they do. nobody protests that they are not excisable as they are fixed to earth.4. the poles, told the learned counsel, are used in the factory in which they are manufactured. if there is one place where the poles cannot be used, it is the place where they are manufactured. the things are to be found in town and country, in hills and valleys - everywhere but in the factory that manufactured them. and for a very simple reason - the factory or unit does not require these poles. nor can we see the rollings downs, or the streets of a city as factories in which these poles are made.

Judgment:
1. The learned counsel, Mr. Sridhar, argued Hvaliantly and with great spirit, but this dispute is not new and is already settled. He argued that the RCC poles were manufactured by different units - each licensed independently of the others. The present unit is licensed in the name of the Executive Engineer of that unit. [In the appeal they speak of 2 units - one at Devangere and another at Chitradurga - of which only one is in the jurisdiction of this Assistant Collector]. Each unit must be taken separately. It is not correct to take the total of all the units in the State. But this does not take into account the fact that licensing focuses on the actual producing division or sub-division. If the licence was in favour of the engineer, that was because he was the applicant: the State Government could have been licensed if it had applied. The argument loses sight of another fact - the poles are not produced for the engineer in charge but are produced for the State Government to be used anywhere such government desires. The poles can even be sent for use outside the State. But that use is not to be determined by the engineer of the unit in which the poles are produced but by the needs of the State electricity authorities. The learned counsel perhaps does not know that there are firms who have factories in different parts of India; each factory licensed independently of the other. But when a notification like 105/80-C.E., is to be applied, the productions of all the factories are totalled: this is what the Assistant Collector has done in this case, and he was quite right. And the result here is that the total exceeds the modificatory limits.

2. The learned counsel said that the poles are not sold. But this does not prevent them from selling them, if they find a customer as they well may. However, not selling a good does not make it non-excisable.

There is no law for this. If it is excisable, it must pay.

3. The poles are planted in the earth, became immovable property, and hence not excisable, declared the learned counsel. First, they are made and became excisable; only later they are transported to the site and fixed to the ground. Second, the central excise law does not say that excisable goods is not excisable if it is fixed to the earth.

Weighbridges, in fact, unlike these poles are, so to speak, born in the earth or grow out of the earth. They are completed only when all components and parts have been fixed to the earth or to other parts fixed to the earth. They are items decreed by law to suffer excise duty; and so they do. Nobody protests that they are not excisable as they are fixed to earth.

4. The poles, told the learned counsel, are used in the factory in which they are manufactured. If there is one place where the poles cannot be used, it is the place where they are manufactured. The things are to be found in town and country, in hills and valleys - everywhere but in the factory that manufactured them. And for a very simple reason - the factory or unit does not require these poles. Nor can we see the rollings downs, or the streets of a city as factories in which these poles are made.