Case: Collector of Central Excise, Coimbatore Vs. Messrs Protein Products of India Limited

2. The respondent, M/s Protein Products of India, manufactures ossein and gelatine. It claimed exemption from excise duty under a notification of the Government of India dated June 30, 1979. By this notification one more item was added to a list of items exempted from payment of excise duty under an earlier notification dated March 1, 1975. This item reads asBones and boneThe respondent company manufactures the above products from bones. Ossein is prepared from bones by dissolving the mineral part of the bones with phosphoric acid. From the ossein so obtained, gelatine is obtained, by treating the same with alkali. Although gelatine can also be manufactured from other sources such as pig skin and hides, it is common ground that the respondent company was manufacturing gelatine only fromThe Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) has taken the view that the products manufactured by the respondent company are bone products and that the company is entitled to the benefit of the notification dated June 30, 1979 referred to earlier. The Tribunal pointed out that, admittedly, the raw material for the two products in question is crushed bones. It accepted the argument urged on behalf of the respondent company that the word product only directed attention to the principal raw material from which the product in question is derived. Bone products does not mean that the products must contain visible pieces of bones and that the expression is limited only to the primary products obtained on crushing of bones such as bone sinew, bone grist, and bone meal. Reference was made to the description of gelatine in the Indian Standard Specifications as a "purified product obtained by partial hydrolysis of collagen, derived from skin, white connective tissues and bones of animals" and to a definition of collagenthe white fibers of the connective tissues of the animal body, particularly in the skin (corium), bones (ossein) and tendons". The Tribunal also referred to an earlier order whereinphosphate, obtained by treating with acid the mineral portions separated from crushed bones, had been held entitled to the benefit of the same notification, treating it as a bone product

Court's reasoning:
6. We see no reason to limit the availability of the exemption under notification in the manner contended or on behalf of the appellant. The terms of the notification only refer to twobones and bone products and there is no scope for applying any rule of ejusdem generis as contended for by the learned Solicitor General. There is also no justification for importing any limitation as to the nature of the products that are entitled to exemption. We see no logic or principle i holding that only products obtained by a physical treatment of bones such as crushing or powdering would be entitled to exemption and not products obtained by chemical treatment. It is true that as gelatine may be produced not merely from bones but also other things such as the skin and tissues of animals. But, us already mentioned, it is not in dispute that only bones are the raw material from which the products manufactured by the respondent company are derived. It is not the case of the appellant that in the manufacture of gelatine or ossein, other raw materials are also use to such an extent as to completely overshadow or render insignificant the utilisation of bones in thethe Tribunal has acted bona fide with natural justice by a speaking under, in our opinion, even if superior court feels that another view is possible, that is no ground for substitution of that view in exercise of power under clause (b) of Section>9. In the present case the Tribunal has taken into consideration all relevant factor and committed no error of principle or law. Even assuming that the terms of the exemption notification can also lend themselves to a narrower construction which may commend itself to another Tribunal or court that alone can be no ground to interfere with the conclusion reached by the Tribunal