Karnataka High Court
Commissioner Of Customs vs M/S Sami Labs Ltd on 9 June, 2011
Bench: V.G.Sabhahit, Ravi Malimath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT B.i§§\£Gi§LORE.___ BATES THIS THE 9"" my BF mug 2911 PRESENT THE HOIVBLE MR. 3537155 'xf.__f3.'.,_SAB%'%%§'?§4i'§9..'jV»' AND THE HONBLE MR,3usTréE"--.;§AvI"r~»'sz$L:.rv:;i;*zf:?~:79._;'"-~ <:sTA.N_a. 28 QF :{:0Q:z_ BETWEEN:
Commissioner o.f<':.u$tc:rr¥:_s Headquarters4_C.ff§c;§:<'V . ' CR. Buiiding Queews Roach 13;, _, . "
Banga!ere'4"'SSQ':L;}GiIf ...AppeHant (By Sré ;<"'; M; 4Moha'n;."
AND' %:;;o::. . = K§AC:B_ Z%1:;?v:§'E~:1:;'§ flea KL! rig' gggaé «H 5 72. fl 3'§ ' 'T:,:m£<§;:.r §.é__$f.- --" .MRes;:>e3r:den'c Rfikmfirii Mama, fikdvacate} This CSTA Es flied under sectieri'13"£}(f:}--ef".t;h,e __ Customs Act, 1962 arising ea': 'cf>'f=.'orc3er"~ _é3te.«:¥'---. '*T.A 28,82,268? eassed En Appesai Nee; {'j--ustom»s',gf'39'8,?O6--4 "
{Fmaf Order No. 2194/2907', "praying to ferrr::,;£a~iie«-v.i:§?;e* substantial euestien of éew stat'e£f"t.hereér%" and set "aside the order of CESTAT; SZB, Bange'§Qre.._passed. in Appeai No. Customs/398/G6 (Féeei €):f~<.ie'r"f'si{>s 234/280?') tiated 2e.0;;.2eo?,. ; « This CST,e._"':_Qmi§'2'§""c:%§ f{;«:{f-.IjeV:3ré::;sV§;1' th%s day, RAVI MALIMATH 3§.s,e-defiizered'"the fe§'§ew-§n.g : ~ 3'..1:3<;:'MEsa:T.V,._ This 'apf3eef'* {$~_»T»F§~§.eti«.~"by the revenue being aggrieved erdeE"t.eiV'{he Tribune! heiding that the "V"-raw'-'.rf:a€;Ae.riae$s/capiféf'goods which are used in the V'"§fesf1fi£'ses:"«..fo%9"efeduction wouid not be hit by the E><.§3*%§; fiatiQn €f%{.;*::Ru£e 6 of Centrai Excise (kemovaé of 'Goods eaféieneesstenal Rate of Duty fer Manufacture of "§>=:<;ise'E:7§e Geedsmufes, 2081.;
2, The assessee is e 1{}®% Expert Qnenteé Unit menefacteréng hereaf extracts, fine ehemicafs etc. 3:': 2I;3~2,:~=2Q§4 a fire eeeiéent teek eiaee 5:': the The teamed counsel aepearmg fer the revem§e-f j--_ "~. contends that the findings recerded by the Triekfiaayii.:Vs'*-"
erreneeus in as much as the fact.-"'t'ha.t the .vs":isii3"ec%v..A'. matter af the goods have been des{ fi>Vye':eTA'i'Ts Expianatien te Ru¥e 6 at' the Ra'ies";"~.:t is.i;a§1t'e.:jeecI":..§;'i*1at when the goeds are test or aestre-'gee. Eminatui*a'¥vvrr:a;2ses frem the mace of pre'tQremeV:fi§iv ta':.V:V_mVa'm;facturéng premises during" ,Eff2anc'.'i"§"rig of the manufa<:ture"__s~ "»vpreVm;§ses_: the E'><p£a.natéon stands attracted. :
4. Heard ;::>V:j_s'n.s:5e§.sT{"'»., Ex§fanV'at€4::':'*'z"te Ruie 6 ef the Cerztrai Excise (%§e:fe axraa:E'-v.e'f:.4(5ae'cfs at Cencessional Rate ef Duty fer Ma.m:f'aetufe:E><C§sabEe Geeasj R{.}§€S{ 208:, reads as 'feiiewsx;
" For the remevai of doubts, it is herebgfi'-1 cferified that subject of geeds sha!!_..§:5e"~75. deemed net te have been used fer, intended ;}U:"'}:'}GSe even if em? 'ef'€E7«e_ :gue.;:iff,%;2«._ V V' of the subject goods is fest erj ¢}esi3re}?ee*"z':§§{ nature! causes er by a':hexgeide£2.le 3Cez':fezi{£'e..s_VV during transport fron§<..e_V'A'£"f3_e " '.'eci:'e' of procurement t3';'e°' " e.:'g*7);%:m__L1fe::tLifes*'s premises or fr'om'~ z%?e:m§feeturer's premises to {he.~;:::'e:e 'ef".spf«:5(;u§'ee"z'ent or durfng 4f};;sma'I.izi§z 3:123'; '"s.ée';?eg.e..V: in the man£'1fe:§iufef'is ;:)!'ejmises'L 5' vv The"'f'V%:be:.;E:al E;"o'r2eIuséon that in View of the faxcts' a:éc$.Ci'reunisté2e,<ies énxsefived, duty cannot be denj_a_vnde:fT'»tm" the-_gAe-suds-"'§vhéch have been destroyed ' 'd_ue V-Vite ;ma=xe£deeiev---------eecident/naturat causes on the V"'g;_f*e:{f_1€i_Ehe:t §?e2e:y--§1ave net been used for the intended ;3u.%;:*e'sfe, was further heéci that the raw 'u., 'meterie~Es}'Cap§ta% gases which aye Era the ereméses ef "e";eee'e_%:Een weeid eel; ee hit by the Exeienatéen te Reie ef the Centre: E:e:§se{Ce:::rei Exeise Reezevei ef Goods At Cencessienei Rate of Duty fer Manufacture of Excésable (Seeds) Rules, 2801.
6, We are in cempéete agree»memt'"vsz§*t-§i'_~!:fi;:g view expressed by the Tribunal. Exe_Iane't%..e'n e of the Ruies is ampiy dear' Ir:'T_ti'f~...e insterft <:asVe;'"t}*.e,§VeV is no dispute that the figeocis ~..i;;_vee'r§"aV':ee§tref§éed by accidentei fire. ef the Commissioner{App.ee'¥s) tVE"-2eé: ""EE;'éI}.';_e;<pressien "handIirzg"' usage of geods when further process 1'-en Therefore; according to him; the geode weu§"c3. 1:1e""---r;<i§x}ered by the expression _VV"dur§e§z'"é:eaedi§ngf7_V_VV'eneV.they weule be hit by the . '§'«.hve View of the Commissienergepeeefs) t%%a:"' e§.:e"f:: :?:_evV.3§e'erk~in-pregrese' materiei weme be V .<:eve%'ee bfigziee Exeieeetéen ie Ruie 5 is incerreet, 3'. The Tribunal has rightfiy passed the arde;'< '»T. which dces net caii for interference. "fhe E><pEa_rj«*&:*'a«i%:;':§.._ _ ' 5 to Ruie 6 is clearh; nssé: attracted in the .4 There is no errsr cammitted by warrants any mterference. It §V.'S--'a4\«'\J€HVi'§3fSOFT€Cffa{'§i*§éF;
8. Hence we are of the.___L:€fe.§js--i..c§ere§:'f tvbat there is me ermr commitiéki _b3}_Ltf2:;e .T':=§'®ina'§ that caiis for any interference' AAcz0j=dE'::gEVy,"fhg§"":v,,sL}bstantial questicsns Csf 4_.£§;3w a% ?§Ef§3~.éi«FTS1:A{€F€31(} j-Eli i'a'§r0ur of the assessee __a1__§1d'-.§'§;~a1'§.;:;'st i:3r2--e:A" €ev:e:%éue»:; The Appeai is accordinigiy