2004 (9) TMI 407 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Duty liability on the value of zinc dust in the assessable value of goods.

Analysis:
The case involved appeals filed by the Revenue against a common order passed by the Collector (Appeals) where demands of duty against the respondents were set aside. The respondents were manufacturing products like primers, paints, and varnishes, including a product called "Zinc-rich spot-welding primer." The issue revolved around whether the value of zinc dust, used in the manufacturing process along with the primer medium, should be included in the assessable value of the goods for duty calculation purposes. The department contended that duty should be paid on the total value of the pack containing both the medium and zinc dust. On the other hand, the respondents argued that since the zinc dust was a duty-paid component and no additional manufacturing process was involved in packing, its cost should not be included in the assessable value.

During the hearing, the Senior Departmental Representative (SDR) reiterated the grounds of the appeals, emphasizing that duty should be paid on the total value of the pack. The Counsel for the respondents, however, maintained that the cost of zinc dust should not be included in the assessable value as it was a duty-paid component and no new manufacturing activity was undertaken during packing. The Tribunal noted that the issue had already been addressed in previous decisions, such as CCE v. Kalinga Paints and Chemicals Industry, India Paint Colour and Varnish Co. Ltd. v. CCE, CCE v. Berger Paints Ltd., and Modi Paint and Varnish Works v. CCE. These precedents established that combining a manufactured component with a bought-out component did not constitute a new manufacturing process, and duty could not be levied on the manufactured component as a separate entity. The Tribunal found that the lower appellate authority had correctly applied the principles from these cases, and no superior legal authority was presented to challenge this interpretation.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order passed by the Collector (Appeals) and rejected the appeals filed by the Revenue. The decision clarified that in cases where a manufactured component is combined with a bought-out component without undergoing further manufacturing processes, duty cannot be imposed on the manufactured component separately.