THIRD MEMBER ON REFERENCE : JUSTICE K.K. USHA, PRESIDENT COLLECTOR OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR Vs. HINDUSTAN COPPER LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE is in appeal against Order -in -Appeal No. 22/JSR/93, dated 14 -5 -93 passed by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta. The issue involved is whether the explosives used by the respondent M/s. Hindustan Copper Ltd. in the copper mines are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 191/87 as amended by Notification No. 63/91. The respondents claim was that the explosives in question were used in mines to extract copper ore by blasting. The ore so obtained is converted into copper concentrates and from the concentrates, copper is manufactured.

(2.) THE notification granted exemption to goods falling within Chapters 28, 29, 36 and 38 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) and used in the manufacture of copper or zinc or lead concentrates. Explosives in question are covered by Chapter 36. The exemption was denied by the Assistant Collector stating that the explosives in question were not being used in the manufacture of copper concentrate. The respondent took up the matter in appeal and the Collector in the impugned order -in -appeal allowed the respondents claim and held as under : -

(3.) THE Revenue has come up in appeal aggrieved by this order. Their submission is that the explosives are used for blasting of mines and to excavate copper ore and are not used in the manufacture of copper. They have submitted that copper ore and copper are two different items and the exemption under Notification No. 191/87 as amended is limited to only copper and hence, cannot be extended to mean to include copper ore also. It has also been stated that the explosives do not find any use in the copper concentration plant and the benefit of the notification cannot be extended to the assessee till such time copper ore is also included in the notification. The appeal also submits that it is settled law that in taxing statute, there is no room for any intentment and that the entire matter is to be governed by the language of the notification [Hemraj Gordhandas v. H.H. Dave, Assistant Collector Central Excise, Surat - 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 350) (S.C.) = ECR C274 (SC)].