Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

31.The protection in Section 102 of the Finance Act read with Notification 9/2016, dated 01.03.2016, is specific exemption subject to certain conditions to be complied by the petitioners. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in W.P.I.L. Ltd., case [supra], cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners, had an occasion to consider the scope of Notification No.46/94, dated 01.03.1994 and Notification No.95/94-CE, dated 25.04.1994. The Hon'ble Supreme Court took note of the fact that parts of power-driven pumps, which were to be utilized for manufacturing power-driven pumps within the factory, continued to be exempted from the excise duty. The exemption was withdrawn when a consolidated Notification No.46/94 was issued on 01.03.1994 with a view to reduce the number of Notifications. Thus, the exemption that was being granted for power-driven pumps as well as parts of power-driven pumps was withdrawn. On realizing the mistake, the Government issued a subsequent Notification on 25.04.1994 in Notification No.95/94. Noting the above, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:-

''13.The contention of the appellant, in our opinion, therefore, is well founded that both power-driven pumps as well as parts of power- driven pumps used for manufacturing of pumps within the factory were exempted from payment of excise duty. We are also satisfied that notifications were rescinded and a consolidated notification was issued on 1-3-1994 with a view to reduce the number of notifications. No demand hence could have been made against the appellant in respect of parts of power-driven pumps by issuing show-cause notices. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP (MD) No.2510 of 2021 etc. batch.
The submission of the appellant is well founded that the Government was satisfied about the policy which was in vogue not to impose excise duty on parts of power-driven pumps used in the factory premises for manufacture of power-driven pumps and to clarify the position, the subsequent notification dated 25-4-1994 was issued. This is also clear if one reads both Notifications Nos. 46/94 dated 1-3-1994 and 95/94 dated 25-4-1994. They read thus:

16.In view of the consistent policy of the Government of exempting parts of power-driven pumps utilised by the factory within the factory premises, it could not be said that while issuing Notification No. 46/94 of 1-3-1994, the exemption in respect of the said item which was operative was either withdrawn or revoked. The action was taken only with a view to rescinding several notifications and by issuing a composite notification. The policy remained as it was and in view of demand being made by the Department, a representation was made by the industries and on being satisfied, the Central Government issued a clarificatory Notification No. 95/94 on 25-4-1994. It was not a new notification granting exemption for the first time in respect of parts of power-driven pumps to be used in the factory for manufacture of pumps but clarified the position and made the position explicit which was implicit.