1996 (7) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. [Order per : Justice U.L. Bhat, President]. - The appellants are absent and are not represented. They have sent written submission requesting that the appeal may be disposed of on merits. We have heard Shri Haja Mohideen, JDR for the respondents. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Rock Drilling bits covered by the erstwhile Tariff Item 51A. Rock Drilling bits contain r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e appellants, the former contending that the activity would amount to manufacture and the latter denying it. That controversy reached the Collector (Appeals) who held that the activity of removal of diamonds from worn out drilling bits and their replacement by salvaged or new diamonds would not amount to manufacture of new diamond drilling bits and therefore, no duty would be recoverable on the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... alvaged or new diamonds. Where the new diamonds are used, the purchasers pay the cost of new diamonds plus the resetting charges and they do not pay for the salvaged diamonds when they are refitted in the drilling bits. The Appeal Memorandum does not speak of salvaged diamonds being used in new Rock Drilling bits. The impugned order does not suggest that the refund claim was with reference to the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X