COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GOA vs. M/S. FUNSKOOL (INDIA) LTD.

Case Type: Civil Appeal

Date of Judgment: 25-01-1990

Preview image for COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GOA vs. M/S. FUNSKOOL (INDIA) LTD.

Full Judgment Text

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION I.A. Nos. 8-10 of 2009 in CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 3460-3462/2004 The Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa & Anr. … Applicant (s) Versus M/s. Funskool (India) Ltd. & Anr. … Respondent(s) O R D E R 1. In view of factual errors committed through oversight in stating particulars of items in dispute (though there is no mistake in recording findings/ th conclusion), we recall our order dated 12 November, 2009 in Civil Appeal Nos. 3460-3462 of 2004 in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa & Anr. v. M/s. Funskool (India) Ltd. & Anr. (“FIL” for short). Accordingly, IA Nos. 8 – 10 of 2009 in Civil Appeal Nos. 3460-3462 of 2004 stand allowed. 2. By consent, Civil Appeal Nos. 3460-3462 of 2004 are taken up for hearing and disposed of. th 3. By our judgment dated 12 November, 2009, in the case of M/s. Pleasantime Products and Anr. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai – I [Civil Appeal Nos. 4309-4311 ....2/- - 2 - of 2008], this Court held that the product “Scrabble/ Upwords” is classifiable under CSH 9504.90 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise and Tariff Act, 1985. The said CSH 9504.90 comes under CH 95.04 which refers to “Articles for funfair, table or parlour games, including pintables, billiards, special tables for casino games and automatic bowling alley equipment”. In the afore-stated judgment, we have taken the view that the product “Scabble/ Upwords” falls under CH 95.04 and we have rejected the argument of the assessee that the said product fell under CSH 9503.00 which refers to the words “other toys; reduced-size models; puzzles of all kinds”. The decision in the case of M/s. Pleasantime Products th (supra) was given on 12 November, 2009. On that day, the connected matter was M/s. FIL (supra). 4. The appeal filed by the Department in the case of M/s. FIL (supra) dealt with 34 items (and not with 12 th items as mentioned in our order dated 12 November, 2009, which is now recalled). We may state that three out of 34 items dealt with Scrabble/ Upwords, Monopoly, Snake and Ladder. Applying our judgment in the case of M/s. Pleasantime Products (supra), we hold that the said three items, namely, Snake and Ladder, Monopoly and Scrabble/ Upwords stand classifiable under CH 95.04 of Central Excise and Tariff Act, 1985. 5. Subject to the question of limitation, we have discussed hereinafter, we remit the case to the Tribunal with the request to examine as to whether each of the remaining 31 items would stand covered by CSH 9504.90 or ...3/- - 3 - by CSH 9503.00. For that purpose, the Tribunal needs to apply the tests which we have enunciated in our judgment in the case of M/s. Pleasantime Products (supra). 6. Now, coming to the question of limitation, we are of the view that, on facts and circumstances of this case, rd in respect of first show-cause notice dated 23 November, 2001, the claim of the Department has got to be confined to the period after October, 2000, and that too, if at all the decision on merits in the matter of classification goes against the assessee. As regards second show-cause st notice dated 1 May, 2001, the said notice is within limitation and, therefore, the Department would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 7. Before concluding, we may clarify that we have th recalled our order dated 12 November, 2009 only to bring about clarity in our order. We could have corrected our order easily by incorporating the correct number of items. However, we thought it best to recall the order and to re- dictate the said order for the sake of clarity. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Appeals filed by the Department are allowed with no order as to costs. ......................J. [S.H. KAPADIA] ......................J. [AFTAB ALAM] New Delhi, January 25, 2010.