Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 388 - CESTAT AHMEDABADProcess amounting to manufacture - marketability - process to obtain Crumb Rubber Powder - demand for the period May 2008 to August 2009 raised through two SCN are time barred as issued beyond normal period or not - HELD THAT:- The root of the entire dispute is settled by the Tribunal in appellant’s own case GUJARAT RECLAIM & RUBBER PRODUCTS LTD., ANKLESHWAR VERSUS COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, BOMBAY [1983 (9) TMI 284 - CEGAT NEW DELHI] where it was held that A simple act of crushing and powdering like this one should not in our opinion be taken to be synonymous with creation of a new product. It is true that crushing does change the physical form as, for instances, the specific surfaces increase considerably thereby allowing intimate mixture etc. etc. but except in very rare instances, the substance remains what it was. The product keeps its original character, molecular structure, chemical identity etc. etc. We are therefore, not satisfied that the demand for duty was sustainable. The matter was again disputed by Department for a subsequent period and Tribunal in it order in appellant’s own case CCE. & C., SURAT-I VERSUS GUJARAT RECLAIM & RUBBER PRODUCTS LTD. [2005 (11) TMI 114 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] has held in favour of the appellant holding that the said process does not amount to manufacture. The Commissioner (Appeals) has relied solely on Circular of CBEC explaining the definition of manufacture. It is found that when the issue regarding the exact identical process has been settled by Tribunal, not once but three times, still the Commissioner has totally ignored the same. Appeal allowed.
|