The answer furnished is this The matter has been companysidered in the Minis try and it is felt that the purpose of rebate scheme of rice bran oil as well as other minor oils envisaged in the Notifications Nos.
24 and 25/75 CE, dated 1 3 75 predecessor Notification Nos.
1120/83 C and 1806 of 1983 C. Soli J. Sorabjee, Ravinder Narain, A.N. Haksar, P.K. Ram and D.N. Misra for the Appellant.
This meant that rice bran oil must form part of the process of manufacture of soap in the factory which is manufacturing the soap and claiming the exemption.
45 and 46 of 1972 where rice bran oil and other minor oils are hydrogenated in one factory and sent to another factory for manufacture of soap.
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.1.1987 of the Cus toms Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal No.
The difficulty in the interpretation has arisen because the process of manufacture of soap in the assessees factory at Ghaziabad did number involve the use of rice bran oil as such.
The rice bran fatty acid was extracted from rice bran oil in the assessees factory elsewhere.
153 of 1973 dated 24.7.73 and 25 of 1975 dated 1.3.75.
K. Ganguli, P. Parmeshwaran, A. Subba Rao and Ms. Sushma Suri for the Respondent.
Another numberification No.
Even though there are three numberifications, the point is companymon and both the appeals involve the same question.
The 1973 numberification is on the same lines with the only difference that the duty exemption per metric tonne is Rs.7.50 instead of Rs.
The numberification of 1975 raised the percentage of rice bran oil referred to in the 1972 numberification from fifteen per cent to twenty five per cent but reduced the duty rebate from Rs.7.50 to Rs.3.50 per metric tonne.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
This factory manufactured soap from rice bran fatty acid.
For example, if the rice bran oil is twenty per cent of the total oils used in the manufacture, the duty exemption will be Rs.7.50 per metric tonne of soap manufactured.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATHAN, J. These are appeals under section 35L of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
24/75 and 25/75 including their predecessor numberifi cations is to encourage the use of inedible oils in the manufacture of soap so as to relieve the pressure on edible oils.
118/75 has been referred to in the papers before us but it has numberrelevance to the question that falls to be decided here and is left out of account.
13041305 of 1987.
The present dispute has arisen in relation to its factory at Ghaziabad in the State of Uttar Pradesh.
The appellant, Tata Oil Mills Company Limited, is engaged in the manufacture of various varieties of soaps.
The numberification will number apply merely because the soap is manufactured out of rice bran fatty acid which in turn has been obtained by hydrolysis of rice bran oil in a different factory may be one belonging to the same asses see which is a separate unit of manufacture for purpose of excise duty .
3 dated 18 7 74 and F. No.
46 of 1972, subsequently amended by the numberifica tion number.
