Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 359 of 1997
PETITIONER:
KHAITAN ELECTRICAL LTD.
RESPONDENT:
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE NEW DELHI
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/08/2003
BENCH:
S. RAJENDRA BABU & B.N. SRIKRISHNA & G.P. MATHUR
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
2003 Supp(2) SCR 268
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
SRIKRISHNA, J. The appellant is engaged in manufacture of electric fans of
different varieties. In respect of its four models of fans called ’Mini’,
Tini’, ’Chiki’ and ’Miki’ the appellant submitted a classification list for
approval under T.I. no. 33(1) and also claimed concessional rate of duty @
5% ad valorem under the Notification No. 46 of 1984 dated 1.3.1984. The
Assistant Collector Central Excise issued a notice dated 23.3.1984 calling
upon the appellant to show cause as to why the aforesaid models of fans
should not be classified under Item No.33(3) and under item No.l(l)(b) of
the Notification No. 46/84.
By an order dated 19.1.85 the Assistant Collector, Central Excise,
Faridabad classified the said products under T.I, No. 33(1 )(b) for the
purpose of availing benefit of Notification No. 46/84. On appeal the
Collector of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals) took the view that
considering the design and manufacture as also the literature containing
the description of the concerned models of the fans, they were used
primarily as table fans. The Collector (Appeals) was of the view that
although there was an arrangement for clamps which enabled the concerned
models of fans to be hung from wall or ceiling, their design and
manufacture was entirely different from regular cabin fans which could
never be placed upon a table. In this view of the matter, the Collector
(Appeals) held that all the four models of fans should be classified as
table fans, attracting ad valorem duty of 5% under T.I.No. 33(l)(a). Upon
further appeals to the Customs, Excise, Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal
(hereinafter referred to as ’CEGAT’), there was a difference of opinion
between the two Members of CEGAT. While the Judicial Member took the view
that the concerned models of fans were to be classified under T.I. no.
33(1) as table fans, both for the purpose of classification as well as the
exemption notification, the Vice President disagreed and was inclined to
uphold the view of the Assistant Collector. In view of the difference of
opinion, the matter was referred to the third Member who agreed with the
Vice President, that for the purpose of duty as well as exemption under the
notification, the fans would fall under sub-item 3(b) of serial no.2. In
accordance with the majority judgment of the CEGAT the order passed by the
Collector (Appeals) was set aside and the order Assistant Collector was
upheld. Hence, this appeals by special leave.
The Tariff details of the Item No.33 are detailed below:
___________________________________________________________________________
___
"Item No.33 - ELECTRIC FANS
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
Item No. Tariff Description Rate of Duty
33 Electric fans including
regulators for electric fans, all sorts-
1 Table, cabin, carriage, pedestal
circulator fans, of a diameter not Fifteen percent ad
40.6 centimetres and regulators valorem
therefor.
2 Electric fans, designed for use in Fifteen
percent ad an industrial system as parts valorem
indispensable for its operation and
have been given for that purpose some special shape or quality which would
not be essential for their use for any other purpose, and regulators
therefor.
3 Electric fans, not otherwise specified, Twenty percent
and regulators therefor. ad valorem
The relevant Notification No.46 of 1984 dated 1.3.1984, reads as follows:
___________________________________________________________________________
______
"EXEMPTION NOTIFICATIONS
ELECTRIC FANS 46/84 - CE, Dt. 1.3.1984
Effective rates of excise duty on specified sizes of ceiling fans and table
fans have been prescribed.
GSR- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the
Central Excise Rules, 1994, the Central Government hereby exempts goods of
the description specified in column (3) of the Table annexed hereto and
falling under the sub-items specified in the corresponding entry in column
(2) of the said Table of item No.33 of the First schedule to the Central
Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), from so much of the duty of excise
leviable thereon under the said Act at the rate specified in the said First
Schedule, as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate specified in
the corresponding entry in column (4) of the said Table.
33-ELECTRIC FANS TABLE
S.NO. Sub-Item. Description Rate
(1) (2) (3)_______________________(4)_____________
1 (1) Electric fans of a diameter
(blade sweep) not exceeding 40.6 centimetres and regulators therefor-
(a) Table fans Five per cent ad
valorem
(b) Cabin carriage, pedestal Ten percent ad and air circulator fans
and valorem regulators therefor
2 (3) Electric fans not otherwise
specified-
(a) Ceiling fans of a diameter (blade sweep) not
exceeding 107 centimetres Seven and a half
per cent ad valorem
(b) Others Fifteen per cent
ad valorem
3 (3) Regulators for electric
Fifteen per cent
fans ad valorem
___________________________________________________________________________
____________
In our view, the Order of the Collector of Customs and Central Excise
(Appeals) was well reasoned order and justified.
The stand of the Department is that the fans in dispute are ’multi purpose’
and could be used as table and also as cabin/carriage fan; that considering
their usage for different purposes the fans in common parlance cannot be
termed as table fan only. The Collector (Appeals) based his decision on the
fact that the fans in question were designed primarily as table fans,
although they were capable for being hung from wall or ceiling. He rightly
pointed out that, because of the peculiarity of design and manufacture, the
concerned fans were entirely different from regular cabin fans which could
not be adapted as table fans, also basing his decision on the description
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
of the fans in the literature distributed by the appellants. The literature
describes it predominantly as a table fan, though capable of being fixed on
the wall or ceiling. In our view, this conclusion was a perfectly
justifiable and reasonable view of the matter and there was no
justification for the CEGAT to interfere with the order of the Collector
(Appeals). We agree with the decision of the Collector (Appeals).
In the result, we allow the appeal, set aside the order of the CEGAT dated
12.8.1996 and restore the decision of the Collector (Appeals) New Delhi
dated 22.7.1986 with regard to the classification of the concerned models
of fans both under the Tariff item as well as the exemption notification.
The appeal is accordingly allowed without any orders as to costs.