COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD

PDF · subscribers
C.A. No.-002467-002467 - 1999Supreme Court24 March 20041 pages
For Petitioner: B. KRISHNA PRASADFor Respondent: V. BALACHANDRAN
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that headers, whether attached to lead or aluminum sheets, are not inputs and therefore not eligible for the benefit of the notification. However, the sheets themselves are inputs and are entitled to the benefit.

What were the facts?

The case concerns the eligibility of lead input sheets and headers for a benefit under Notification No. 217/86-CE. The Tribunal had previously ruled that lead input sheets were eligible, but headers were not, without providing clear reasons.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether lead input sheets and headers qualified as 'inputs' for the purpose of claiming exemption under Notification No. 217/86-CE.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Notification No. 217/86-CE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2467 of 1999 PETITIONER: Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur RESPONDENT: M/s Hindustan Zinc Ltd., DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/03/2004 BENCH: S. N. Variava & H. K. Sema

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T (with C.A. No. 9276 of 2003) S. N. VARIAVA, J.

The question which arises in these two Appeals is whether the Respondents are entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 217/86-CE dated 2nd April, 1986. The Tribunal has, in the impugned Orders without giving any ascertainable reasons, held that the lead input sheet would be eligible to the benefit of the Notification, but the headers would not be eligible to the benefit of the Notification.

Notification No. 217/86-CE of 1986 only exempts inputs. It also clarifies that machine, machinery, plant equipment, apparatus, tools or appliances used for manufacturing and processing of any goods or bringing about any change in any substance or in relation to a final product shall be excluded from the term "inputs". What is questioned before us is the finding of the Tribunal that the lead anode sheets are eligible to the benefit of the Notification.

It was fairly admitted that sheets would be an input and that if it is clarified that the Notification only applies to sheets and not to the final product manufactured after headers are fixed to the sheets, the Deptt. will be satisfied. To this there is no objection.

In our view it is clear that headers whether attached to lead or aluminium sheets are not inputs. As they are not inputs the benefit of the Notification would not be available to headers. However, the sheets are inputs and they would be entitled to the benefit of the Notification.

These Appeals stand disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →