Whether Panchang classifiable as calendar?

PJ/CASE LAW/2016-17/3208

Case:- LALA RAMSWAROOP RAMNARAYAN AND SONS VERSUS COMMR OF C.EX. & S.T.,BHOPAL

Citation:- 2016 (337) E.L.T. 312 (Tri.-Del.)

Brief facts:- These two appeals are on the same issue by the same appellant, hence, taken up together for disposal.
The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of calendar/panchang. Revenue felt that they are liable to Central Excise duty under Central Excise Tariff Heading (C.E.T.H.) 4910.00.90 as calendars. Proceedings initiated against the appellants resulted in the original order dated 26-3-2013. It was held by Original Authority that the items manufactured by the appellants are calendar under C.E.T.H. 4910 00 90 attracting Central Excise duty @1% adv., under Notification No. 1/2011-C.E., dated 1-3-2011. On appeal the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the original order. Aggrieved, the appellants are before Tribunal in appeal.

Appellant’s contention:- Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the lower authorities erred in appreciating the facts and actual nature of the impugned products. He submitted a copy of current year’s panchang/calendar which is similar to the impugned goods and explained the various contents of the said panchang. He relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of M.P., Jabalpur in Lala Ramswaroop Ramnarayan & Sons- (1993) 26 VKN-5. The Hon’ble High Court, in this case dealing with similar items of related unit, held that the impugned publication is an ‘almanac’ or a ‘panchang’. The case was regarding sales tax liability on the impugned goods based on the classification either as calendar or panchang.

Respondent’s contention:- Ld. AR reiterated the findings of the lower authorities and submitted that the impugned publications are nothing but calendars following monthly date chart starting from January and ending in December of a calendar year.

Reasoning of judgement:-The lower authorities held that the impugned items are nothing but calendars classifiable under Heading 4910 of Central Excise Tariff. It was contended that calendars may contain, in addition to the nominal sequence of dates, days of the week etc. various other items of information, such as, notes of important events, festivals, astronomical and other data etc. The point for decision is whether or not the impugned publications are more appropriately categorized as calendars (CETH 4910) or as panchang or almanac (CETH 4901). We find that calendars are specifically covered by name under C.E.T.H. 4910. We have perused the ‘Panchang’ published by the appellants. The ld. Counsel claimed that it contained almost 99 types of information covering a wide range of subjects. He submitted a list of such information. While we take note that the distinction between a calendar and almanac is not categorical and perfect, certain salient features and the actual nature of the publication will indicate the basic use. Firstly, we find that the impugned publication is named and marketed as ‘Panchang’. Less than 50% of the page space displays the date sequence of the calendar month. The page contains many details of auspicious times, grihasthithi Rashiphal other information of planetary position etc. We find that the Hon’ble M.P. High Court decision on a similar publication (supra) is relevant here. The High Court examined in detail various dictionary meanings of ‘almanac’ and after examining of the contents of the publication concluded that the same is a ‘panchang’ or ‘almanac’ though it contains in a corner of every page space for milk account and notes. We find on perusal, that the impugned items marketed as ‘Panchang’ is not a simple calendar but essentially a publication containing large number of various information not incidental only to sequence of dates alone. The predominant features are details of ‘Tithi’, ‘Nakshatra’, ‘Vara’, ‘Yoga’ and ‘Karana’ which are linked to the dates in a calendar month. After careful evaluation of the facts and nature of impugned publication and relying on the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. decision (supra) we find that the impugned items cannot be categorized as ‘calendars’ and classified under C.E.T.H. 4910. The findings of the lower authorities are not sustainable. As such, the appeals are allowed.

Decision:-Appeal allowed.

Comment:-The analogy of this case is that the PANCHANG cannot be categorized as ‘calendars’ and is rather classifiable under C.E.T.H. 4910 by relying on the decision given by the Hon’ble High Court of M.P. because less than 50% of the page space displays the date sequence of the calendar month. The Panchang displays information as regards tithi, nakshatra etc. substantially rather than the details mentioned on a calendar.

Prepared By:- Rakshay Tater

Comments

PJ/CASE LAW/2016-17/3208

Post a Comment

Query