Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
Hatsun Food Company vs Cce on 28 March, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2002(104)ECR498(TRI.-CHENNAI)
ORDER G.N. Srinivasan, Member (J)
1. This appeal came up for hearing today. The representative of the appellant has requested the Tribunal for an adjournment of the hearing as one Mr. P.C. Anand is unable to be present at the Tribunal due to unavoidable personal reasons, that too for doing a lecture assignment in a leading automotive manufacturer company.
2. I am constrained to comment that when the case has been fixed in the Tribunal, it would have been better the representative appears before the Tribunal instead of accepting the lecture assignment. I decline the request on the ground that the case can be decided in favour of the appellant in the absence of the appellant or his representative.
3. The issue involved in this matter is about the eligibility of modvat credit on capital goods. This is for the period 1993-94 to 1997-98. The department's case is that it is not the eligibility which is enshrined in the provisions of the Central Excise Rules are not retrospective in nature. This has been reiterated by Ld. DR Shri C. Mani before me.
4. I have considered this aspect and disagree with the contention raised by the respondent department. It has been specifically held in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur that the rule was clarificatory in nature as disclosed in the speech of the Finance Minister while moving the Finance Bill 1996. Learned Two Members have cited the judgment of Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese ; Sole Trustee Loksikshan Trust 1976 TLR Page 1; CIT v. Mahindra and Mahindra for this proposition. The said case clearly decides in favour of the assessee in this case.
5. It has also been noted by me the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in the case of SIV Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Coimbatore wherein the Division Bench of the Madras High Court has held as follows:
27. It is also necessary to keep in view the fact that this case arose in the early years of the introduction of the Modvat schema for capital goods when there was uncertainty in the minds of all concerned as to the precise scope of the coverage. The fact that by subsequent amendments, it has been made clear that wires and cables were not meant to be excluded from the category of capital goods, would only mean that an ambiguity which existed earlier was subsequently clarified. it does not mean as was contended for the Revenue, that a concession which was not available earlier was extended for the first time by the subsequent amendment.
28. Whenever the legislature or the Rule making authority employs words of general import, certain degree of ambiguity is inevitably associated with the term so employed. The fact that the rule making authority has chosen to understand those terms in a narrow sense does not mean that was the sense in which the rule was intended to be understood. It is for the Court to ultimately decide the true scope of the language employed in the statue having regard to the settled canons of construction governing the interpretation of statues and statutory rules.
From the reading of the above two judgments, it is clear to be held that the case has to be decided in favour of the assessee rejecting the claim of the respondent-department. Appeal stands allowed with consequential relief, if any, according to law.
(Pronounced and Dictated in Court)