AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
1.The Tribunal proceeded on the basis of an earlier judgment in 1986 (10) ECC 285 , wherein it was held that the commodity - Spelt in question itself was exempted from tax. Therefore, the question of valuation would not arise. We do not think we should interfere with the order made by the Tribunal.
Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant, however, brings to our notice a subsequent decision of the 1999 (110) ELT 735 in which the product - Spelt is held to be only an edible preparation and not a dairy product. The claim made by the respondent that it was exempted from duty could not be disputed at all as it was exempted in view of the decision in 1987 (27) E.L.T. 195. Hence the question of valuation did not arise for consideration.
The parties could not avail of the benefit of decision in 1999 (110) E.L.T. 735, as the decision thereto was rendered much later.
As long as the commodity stood exempted from tax its valuation would not arise at all. The later decision could be applied in future cases where the question arises as to whether the commodity was exempted or not.
In this light it is unnecessary to examine correctness of the decision of the Tribunal. The appeal is dismissed accordingly.