Collector Of Central Excise vs S.K. Engg. And Trading Co. on 29 July, 1993
Mahaganapathi Engg. Works v. Collector of Central Excise, 1992 (62) E.L.T. 193
and referring to the term 'a factory' appearing in the notification in question contended that the term refers to a single factory and the word 'a' has to be construed as "any". In this context referred to the alphabet 'a' "the" and the meaning attached to it as given in "The World Book Dictionary Vol. I. On a reading of these words, 'a' would refer to "any" and hence if the manufacturer is having a certificate for even any of the factory held by him then the benefit of the notification cannot be denied. As also the notification refers to clearances of 'one or more' factories of a manufacturer. The certificate of registration is for a manufacture and therefore, the address from the unit was shifted to the new premises is deemed to have been covered in the registration certificate originally taken. He pointed out that in all the cases in hand the units had shifted to the new premises and the change of address in the certificate has to be taken to from the original date of registration of the certificate.