Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Ranchi Solvent Oil Industries vs Collr. Of Central Ex. on 22 July, 1994
Equivalent citations: 1995(76)ELT128(TRI-DEL)
ORDER S.L. Peeran, Member (J)
1. When the case was called none has appeared on behalf of the appellants. However, by their Letter dt. 15-7-1994 they have requested the case to be dealt with on merits and on the basis of the submissions made by them in their letter.
2. In this case the department had raised demand for the period 1-1-1984 to 31-12-1984 under the Vegetable Oil Cess Act, 1983 read with the National Oilseeds & Vegetable Oils Development Board Act, 1983, in resect of Solvent Oil said to have been manufactured by the appellants by way of 'Solvent extraction method' from oil cakes of Karanja, Kusum, Mahua etc. They have claimed that in this process of extraction, no oil seeds or any other oil bearing materials of plant origin are used, and that the same is not included in the definition of Vegetable oil as defined under the National Oilseeds & Vegetable Oils Development Board Act, 1983. Therefore, they have submitted that demands confirmed under such legislation are not maintainable and in respect of their pleas they have relied on the rulings rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bhasil Oil Mills v. Union of India, as reported in 1990 (47) E.L.T. 305 and also ruling rendered by the Allahabad High Court in the case of U.P. Solvent Extractors' Association v. Union of India, as reported in 1989 (39) E.L.T. 18, and the appellants pray that in terms of all these rulings, the appeal may be allowed in their favour.
3. Ld. JDR, Sh. Somesh Arora also brings to our notice Tribunal's ruling rendered in the case of Andhra Sugars Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, rendered in the Final Order No. 284-287/93-C, dt, 13-9-1993. In all these rulings it has been held that the Oil extracted from oil cakes by Solvent Extraction process does not come within the definition of Vegetable Oil in terms of definition as defined in the said legislation. In that view of the matter, following the ratio of the rulings, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief.