Page 248 - ELT_2nd_15th April 2020_Vol 372_Part

294 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

(1) (2) (3) (4)
33 3401 lkcqu] ftlds fofuekZ.k ;k mlds laca/k esa fdlh dqN ugha
izfØ;k esa fo|qr ;k Hkki dh lgk;rk ugha yh tkrh gSA

41. Both the Hindi version of the Tariff Act and the Exemption Notifi-
cation use the word ‘vidyut’, whereas the word ‘power’ has been used in the
English version of the Tariff Act and the Exemption Notification. The word
‘vidyut’ means ‘electricity’ and so ‘power’ as used in English should be under-
stood to mean ‘electricity’ alone.
42. In Pappu Sweets, the Supreme Court also examined the Hindi ver-
sion of the Notification where the word ‘mithai’ was used. The Supreme Court
observed that the word ‘mithai’ has a definite connotation and it can be said with
a reasonable amount of certainty that people in this country do not consider ‘tof-
fee’ as ‘mithai’. This is what was also observed by the Supreme Court in Commis-
sioner of Trade Tax, Uttar Pradesh v. Associated Distributors Ltd. [(2008) 7 SCC 409]
and Park Leather Industry (P) Ltd. and Another v. State of U.P. and Others [(2001) 3
SCC 135]. Paragraph 23 of the decision of the Supreme Court in Park Leather In-
dustry is reproduced below :
“23. Even otherwise, our above view is supported by the Hindi version of
the definition. As has been set out in the case of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti
it is well known that in U.P. all legislations are in Hindi. Of course as Eng-
lish version is simultaneously published. Undoubtedly, if there is conflict
between the two then the English version would prevail. However, if there
is no conflict then one can always have assistance of the Hindi version in
order to find out whether the word used in English includes a particular
item or not. In the Hindi version the word used as “Chamra”. There can be
no dispute that the term “Chamra” would include “leather” in all its forms.”
43. In the instant case, there is no apparent conflict in the English and
Hindi version of the Tariff Act and the Exemption Notification and, therefore,
assistance can be taken of the Hindi version. The Hindi version removes all
doubts since the word ‘vidyut’ has been used, which means ‘electricity’.
44. In view of the aforesaid, a restricted meaning to the expression
‘power’ should be given by confining it to ‘electricity’, which view is duly sup-
ported by the Hindi version of the Tariff Act and the Exemption Notification.
45. The Appellant has also placed reliance upon the two circulars dated
22 March, 1968 and 25 March, 1968 that were issued by the Central Board of Ex-
cise & Customs in the context of identically worded Central Excise Notifications
that clarified that the use of ‘gas’ would not be the same as use of ‘power’. The
relevant portion of the Circular dated 22 Match, 1968 is as follows :
“43. 1968 Budget-Central Excise-Definition of ‘Power’ used in item No.
40-Steel Furniture.
Reference C.C.E., Allahabad’s letter No. V-40(30)183/68, dated the 5th
March, 1968 (copy appended). The instruction issued by him that the use of
gas for welding steel furniture parts will not be considered as use of ‘Pow-
er’ is hereby confirmed.

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th April 2020  264