TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacture is required to be satisfied first for holding any product as excisable. See UNION OF INDIA Versus DELHI CLOTH & GENERAL MILLS CO. LTD.[1997 (5) TMI 49 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] & reiterated in UOI v. Parle Products Limited [1993 (1) TMI 100 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] Thus if no manufacturing activity has taken place, mere mention of the goods in the tariff will not make the said goods as excisable goods. It is not the Revenue’s case that by any artificial definition, the screening of Iron Ore has been held to be process of manufacture - in favour of assessee. - E/2228/2010-SM(BR) - 1456/2012-SM(BR)(PB) - Dated:- 3-10-2012 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. Shri Bharat Bhushan, DR, for the Appellant. None, for the Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals). It was contended by the assessee that invocation of Rule 6(3)(b) is wholly misconceived inasmuch as Iron Ore Fines is not a manufactured product. The said Fines emerge on account of screening employed on the Iron Ore and emerge as a waste product. Provisions of Rule 6 are attracted only when an assessee is engaged in the manufacture of both dutiable and exempted final product. Inasmuch as such Iron Ore Fines is a waste product generated in the course of screening Iron Ore, in the process of manufacture of Sponge Iron, it cannot be held to be the manufactured and hence excisable product. They also relied upon various decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court including the one given in the case of ACC, Visakhapatnam v. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods, the Appellant have submitted that it is not at all a manufactured product. The definition or test more commonly used for as ascertaining whether manufacture for the purpose of attracting Central Excise levy has taken place or not is the one evolved by Hon ble Supreme Court in DCN case 1997 (92) E.L.T. 315 (S.C.) and reiterated in UOI v. Parle Products Limited - 1994 (74) E.L.T. 492 (S.C.) and Ujagar Prints v. UOI - 1988 (38) E.L.T. 535 (S.C.), accordingly to which the activity or process in order to amount to manufacture must lead to emergence of a new commercial product, different from the one with which the process started. In other words, there should be an article with different name, character and use. Thus, a process which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... maller size and therefore it cannot be termed as a product which came into existence as a result of process of manufacture. Further no prudent person will establish a factory for manufacture of waste. The Applicant have set up their unit for production of sponge Iron. They are using Iron ore as a raw material. In the process of handling, shorting, grading, screening of the raw material and to obtain iron ore of desired size to be used in the kiln, Iron ore fines (i.e. iron ore of smaller size not usable in the kiln) came into existence, as inevitable product which Appellant are selling as waste. The input services are used for procurement of raw material and during processing of such raw material for the purpose of production of desired pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
