Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 2448 of 1992
PETITIONER:
GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS CO.
RESPONDENT:
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18/01/2001
BENCH:
B.N. KIRPAL & RUMA PAL & BRIJESH KUMAR
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
2001 (1) SCR 447
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KIRPAL, J.
Civil Appeal Nos. 2448/92 arid 9122/1994.
Interpretation of the exemption notifications relating to heavy petroleum
stock is for consideration in these appeals.
The appellants manufacture fertilizers, In the manufacture thereof apart
from other items they also use Low Sulphur Heavy Stock (hereinafter
referred to as "LSHS") which is regarded as heavy petroleum stock in
respect of which exemption notifications have been issued.
The Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. had applied in 1983 for a
licence in Form-L6 so as to obtain without payment of duty excisable goods,
namely, LSHS which was to be used for the industrial process of manufacture
of fertilizers. In the said application, it was stated that 30,000 metric
tonnes of LSHS was to be used as feed stock per month. The application also
gave the manner of manufacture and it was inter alia staled that Ammonia
was manufactured using furnace oil arid LSHS as feed stock alongwith oxygen
and steam by employing partial oxidation process. Explaining the process
further, it was stated that as a result of employing the said partial
oxidation process, gases are produced which are contaminated with soot.
Thereafter, there are stages at which the gases initially produced are
purified and ultimately when the impurities have been removed the gas is
compressed and becomes liquid ammonia. This liquid ammonia is then used for
the manufacture of urea fertilizers.
According to the appellants, LSHS was used in twin fold manner - (a)
directly in manufacture of fertilizers and (b) for manufacture of steam
which in turn was used in manufacture of fertilizers.
There are three notifications of exemption with which we are concerned in
the present eases. They are notification Nos. 147/1974, 75/1984 and 127/
1988. It is not in dispute that the first two notifications, for the
purpose of these cases, are similar and therefore we need refer to only one
of them namely, notification No. 147/1974 which reads as follows:
"Exemption to Furnace Oil and heavy petroleum stock if used as feed stock
in the manufacture of fertilizers:-
In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Rule (1) of rule 8 of the
Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts furnace
oil and heavy petroleum stock failing respectively under Item Nos. 10 and
11A of the First Schedule to the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of
1944} intended for use as feed stock in the manufacture of fertilizers,
from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon:
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
Provided that-
(i) it is proved to the satisfaction of the Assistant Collector of Central
Excise that such furnace oil or heavy petroleum stock is so used, and
(ii) the procedure set out in chapter x of the Central Excise Rules, 1944,
is followed."
As far as notification No. 127/1988 is concerned the relevant part, namely
item Nos. 56 and 57 in the table of the said notification is as follows:-
Intended for use as feed stock in the manufacture of fertilizers.
Intended for use otherwise than as feed stock in the manufacture of
fertilizers.
56. Residues of petroleum oils or of NIL oils obtained from bituminous
minerals, including heavy petroleum stock, low sulphur heavy stock and
other residual fuel oils falling under heading No. 27.13 of the said
Schedule.
57, Residues of petroleum oils or of Rs. 70 oils obtained from
bituminous per minerals, including heavy tonne petroleum stock,
low sulphur heavy stock and other residual fuel oils falling under heading
No. 27.13 of the said Schedule.
The case of the appellants is that LSHS has been used for the manufacture
of fertilizers. It is contended that with the help of LSHS steam was
produced which is an integral part in the process of manufacture of gases
which ultimately result in the formation of liquid ammonia. It is from
liquid ammonia that urea is ultimately being manufactured. Just as LSHS and
furnace oil, when first reacted with oxygen steam results in the form of
ammonia, similarly, steam also goes into the process of manufacture of
liquid ammonia and in production of steam LSHS is used and therefore the
entire quantity of LSHS was entitled to full exemption.
The revenue did not accept this contention. After show cause notice had
been issued and reply received, the appellants were asked to pay duty on
the basis that they were not entitled to the benefit of the first two
notifications inasmuch as that part of LSHS which had been used for
producing steam would not be regarded as having been used as feed stock.
Appeal to the CEGAT being unsuccessful, the present appeals have arisen.
Learned counsel for the appellants in support of their submission that they
were entitled to the benefit of the said notifications Nos. 147/1974 and
75/1984 have strongly relied upon the decision of the Patna High Court in
the Case of Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. V. Collector of Central
Excise, Patna, reported in [2000] 122 ELT 343. In that decision, the Patna
High Court had come to the conclusion that even that portion of LSHS which
had been used for generating steam which in turn had resulted in the
manufacture of liquid ammonia would be entitled to the benefit of the
exemption notification.
Reading the three notifications, it is clear that LSHS is entitled to
exemption either wholly or in part if it is used in the manufacture of
fertilizers. The said entries 56 and 75 are similar to entries 25 and 26 of
the exemption notification No. 75/1984 which after amendment inter alia
related to furnace oil. In item 25 of this notification there was complete
exemption from duty in relation to furnace oil if it was- "intended for use
as feed stock in the manufacture of fertilizers," Under Entry 26 duty of
furnace oil was payable at Rs. 64.10 per Kl. in respect of that furnace oil
which was -"intended for use otherwise than as feed stock in the
manufacture of fertilisers". At item Nos. 56 and 57 of the notification No,
127/1988 which had been quoted herein above, the language is similar in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
respect of LSHS to that of furnace oil. Under Entry 56 there is a complete
exemption is respect of LSHS which is intended for use as feed stock in the
manufacture of fertilizers but if LSHS was intended for use otherwise than
as feed stock but in the manufacture of fertilizers duty at the rate of Rs.
70 per tonne had to be paid.
The aforesaid notifications clearly show that In the manufacture of
fertilizers there may be more than one way in which LSHS may be used. It is
only if LSHS is used as ’feed stock’ that there is a complete exemption
from duty.
The question, therefore arises as to what is ’feed stock’. Reference to the
Condensed Chemical Dictionary (Tenth Edition) by Gessner G. Hawley defines
feed stock as "Gaseous or liquid petroleum-derived hydro carbons or
mixtures of hydro carbons from which gasoline, oil fuel, petro-chemicals
are produced by thermal or catalytic cracking........" In McGraw Hill’s
Dictionary on Scientific and Technical Terms, feed stock has been defined
as raw material furnished to a machine for process. According to the
Glossary of Petroleum term as per the Indian Standards Institute feed stock
means "primary material introduced into a plant for processing".
The aforesaid application for licence of M/s. Gujarat Narmada Valley
Fertilizers Co. Ltd. clearly indicated that LSHS was to be used as feed
stock and that was to be used alongwith oxygen and steam for employing
partial oxidation process. In the said application, it was not indicated
that LSHS was to be used in the production of steam which in turn was to
be employed in the manufacture of liquid ammonia. LSHS. according to the
said application, was to be used as feed stock in the manufacture of
fertilizers As is evident from hereinabove. LSHS has been used in two ways.
Firstly, it had been used as feed stock in the oxidation process when
alongwith furnace oil it came in contact with oxygen and steam which
resulted in gas with soot which was ultimately subjected to further process
before leading to liquid ammonia. Secondly, it was used for adding to the
coal which was burnt for boiling water which resulted in the production of
steam which was also an essential part of the process of manufacture of
fertilizers but that by itself would not entitle them to the benefit of
complete exemption from excise duty unless it can be shown that LSHS has
been used as feed stock in the manufacture. The notifications clearly
indicate that it is only in respect of the limited use of LSHS as feed
stock that complete exemption has been granted. LSHS used in the
manufacture of fertilizers, but not as feed stock, was however subject to
excise duty though at a tower rate.
The very process of manufacture indicated hereinabove shows that LSHS, as a
result of chemical reaction, becomes gas which is subsequently purified
resulting in liquid ammonia which can be regarded as feed stock in contra-
distinction to LSHS which is burnt and as a result whereof steam is
generated which in turn is used in the process. In the above-mentioned
second ease, LSHS is used in the manufacture of ammonia but not as a feed
stock. As such, benefit of notification No. 127/1988 would be available to
the appellants in respect of LSHS which has been used for generating steam
and this will be with effect from 1st March, 1988. In respect of the
earlier period, it is only that part of LSHS which will be entitled to 100
per cent exemption from excise duty by virtue of notification No. 147/1974
and notification No. 75/1984 which has been used as feed stock arid not for
the purpose of generating steam.
For the aforesaid reasons, while LA. No. 3/1995 in C. A. No. 9122/1994 is
allowed and it is held that the appellants therein are entitled to the
benefit of notification No. 127/1988 with effect from 1st March, 1988, the
appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.
C.A. Nos. 3119, 3166 and 3167/2000.
In these appeals, the facts are similar to M/s. Gujarat Narmada Valley
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
Fertilizers Corporation Ltd. The only difference is in the manufacture of
fertilizers in respect of liquid ammonia it is Methonol which is produced.
For the reasons stated in our decision in C. A. No. 2448/1992 these appeals
are also dismissed in so far as LSHS is used for the production of steam.