EXIDE INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C EX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant writ petition, the petitioner-company has challenged an order dated November 6,1997 and March 4,1998 passed by the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Bench, Calcutta.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that it carries on business of manufacturing various types of electric accumulators including stationary cells/batteries. It is contended that it has been judicially pronounced that in the commercial sense as well as technically a single cell is a battery and it is not necessary that there must be more than one cell to make up a battery. The company manufactures, inter alia, cell/battery of two volt capacity which is designed for service at a permanent location and supplies electrical energy without any accessory being required for the said purpose. It is contended that each two volt cell by itself is a stationary battery commercially as well as technically and independently functions as one. It is further submitted that a stationary battery is a storage battery designed for service at a permanent location unlike other batteries designed for use in mobile locations like vehicles etc. Stationary batteries are mainly used in sectors like Telecommunication, Power, Defence, Railways etc. in fixed locations as stand by for providing emergency power supply so that the disruption in normal power supply does not affect the work in such critical sectors. Because of the nature of use of the stationary batteries, their dimensions vary according to the fixed location where the same are intended to be used. Other storage batteries are mainly purchased by vehicle manufacturers. Thus, the stationary batteries are normally used in stationary applications in fixed locations as opposed to other storage batteries which are used in cars, trucks, jeeps, tractors etc.

(3.) It is also contended that in view of the different applications of the stationary batteries and other storage batteries, the materials used for the manufacture and construction thereof are different. The Company's factory came under the purview of Central Excise in the year 1955. Since inception, the company has been duly filing classification lists along with detailed list of the various types of electric accumulators including stationary cells/batteries being manufactured by it and the company is always claiming exemption under the Notification bearing No. 16 / 55-C .E. for the period up to February 28, 1986 in case of such stationary batteries. The said classification lists filed since inception were duly approved and the exemption as claimed was duly granted after a full and thorough enquiry and/or investigation. The Central Excise Authorities were all along fully satisfied that the goods in question were stationary batteries and were exempted under the said notification. The goods in question were also correctly described in the Central Excise Gate Passes as stationary cells/batteries and copies of the said gate passes were also duly filed with the Central Excise Department.