INDIAN ALUMINIUM CABLES LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner carries onthe business of manufacture and sale of aluminium conductors used for transmission of high voltage of electriccurrent. It has its factory, amongst other places, at Faridabad in the State of Haryana.

(2.) In the process of manufacture of aluminium conductors, the petitioner obtains at an intermediary stage,what is described as aluminium rods, which are furtherprocessed to manufacture aluminium conductors and cables. The said intermediary product, according to the petitioner, is obtained by a specialised process known as the"properzi process". The resultant product, according tothe petitioner, is aluminium rods, known both technicallyas well as commercially as properzi rods. The basic rawmaterial required for the manufacture of this product isE.C. Grade aluminium ingots on which, admittedly, exciseduty is paid. The said intermediary' product has been regarded by the excise authorities as attracting duty underEntry No. 27(a) (ii) of the first Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The petitioner contests the levy.It contends that the properzi rods manufactured by it arenot "Wire bars, wire rods and castings." The petitioner'scase is that both commercially and technically the properzirods are not aluminium wire rods which are distinct commerical commodity and so. Entry 27 (a) (ii) cannot be invoked by the excise authorities.

(3.) The petitioner also contends that the properzi rodsmanufactured by it cannot also be regarded as pipes andtubes, other than excluded pipes and tubes, mentioned inEntry 27(d)Entry 27(3) arid ^3) reads as under :