TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 842X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by answering the substantial question of law in favour of the revenue and against the assessee, Accordingly, the appeal is allowed - 17 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 1-4-2010 - K.L. Manjunath and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : S/Shri Raghavendra B. Hinjer for M.R. Bhaskar, for the Appellant. Shri M.A. Narayan, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : Nagarathna, J.]. The revenue has preferred this appeal by challenging the order dated 27-6-2006 passed in Final Order No. 1112/2006 arising in Appeal No. E/1199/2005 [2006 (206) E.L.T. 1025 (Tri. - Bang.)] passed by CESTAT at Bangalore, by raising the following question of law as framed by this court on 4-7-2007 while admitting the appeal : Whether the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing was purchasing aluminium composite panels and thereafter carrying on the activity of cutting and routing (cutting the grooves) and was making use of the same that was executed by the assessee and therefore no manufacturing activity was carried on by the assessee and that the Tribunal was right in holding that since no material evidence was produced by the revenue to substantiate its contention that activity carried on by the assessee was a manufacturing activity, it was justified in allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the both the parties and after perusal of the material on record, it is not in dispute that the respondent assessee has been purchasing aluminium composite panels and on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that emerges is a new product which is commercially identifiable and different from the product which assessee had purchased. Therefore, the product which is termed after the said operations are carried out is different from what had been purchased as such by the assessee. 6. The Apex Court in the case of Laminated Packaging Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E., [1990 (49) E.L.T. 326 (S.C.) and in Electronics Mechanical Industries v. C.C.E., 1995 (76) E.L.T. 309 (CEGAT) has held that if a different identifiable product commercially known as a different category product emerges out of the process though it falls under the same heading then it is taxable. The same view has been held in other cases also particularly in AIR 1988 SC 518, in the case of TVL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roperty. 8. In the instant case, since the process of cutting, grooving and routing of aluminium sheets to make composite panels amounts to manufacture as a new product emerges the product is dutiable. The Tribunal has not taken into consideration the actual process involved and the nature of the operation that have been carried out by the respondent-assessee in changing the nature of the product which it has been using to suit the particular requirement. That mere cutting sheets to size, drilling, grooving, welding, fastening etc. is not manufacture when the original identity of the product is not lost. In several other cases it was held that cutting to size, welding steel plate to make Steel Band which is a product with distinct nam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
