Conflict of views

LEGAL DIGEST

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court has asked a five-judge Constitution bench to resolve a conflict of views on the validity of circulars of the Central Board of Excise and Customs which go against court judgments.

In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs Ratan Melting & Wire Industries, the judges pointed out that in a 2002 judgment (Dhiren Chemicals case), it was ruled that circulars shall prevail.

In a 2004 judgment, however, the court asserted that the court's view shall prevail over the circulars. Since there is still confusion in this field, a Constitution bench should clarify the situation, the new order said.

Excise on cases

The Supreme Court held last week that the cost of wooden cases in which sheet glass is packed by glass manufacturers would be included in the assessable value for excise purposes.

The court passed this ruling in the appeal of Triveni Glass Ltd against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court against it. The same Supreme Court bench reaffirmed the view in another appeal, Commissioner of Central Excise vs Hindustan Safety Glass Works Ltd.

Under the Central Excise Act, the cost of packing should be included unless the packing is of a durable nature and is returnable. The Court stated that though the wooden cases are durable, there was no agreement or arrangement making them returnable.

Laxmi gets contract

The Supreme Court has upheld the award of contract for providing pre-paid telephone services in certain areas of Orissa to Laxmi Sales Corporation.

The rival contenders had moved the Orissa High Court against the award, and the high court set aside the award in favour of the corporation. On appeal, the Supreme Court quashed the high court order.