TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any infirmity in the impugned order, therefore, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee - Excise Appeal No. 986 of 2007 - Final Order No. A/53502/2015-EX(DB) - Dated:- 18-11-2015 - Ashok Jindal, Member (J) And B. Ravichandran, Member (T) For the Appellant : Ms Neha Garg, AR ( DR ) For the Respondent : None ORDER Per Ashok Jindal Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein it is held that the conversation of saree into a designer saree is not a process of manufacture as per Section 2 (f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The facts of the case are that the respondent is a fashion designer and engaged in manufacture of designer ready to wear garments. On scrutiny of r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded a fact that I find that it is not a disputed fact that the appellants have carried out embroidery and hemming work etc. on the duty paid sarees purchased from the market . The fact recorded by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not been controverted by the learned AR, therefore, the CBEC Circular dated 03/11/2000 has no application to the facts of this case as in a case if the fabrics is in running length with same pattern of weaving which does not contain extra threads contributing greater thickness to the cloth with the outermost line running at or near the edges at regular interval so as to provide a substitute for hem, the same is not the case in hand, as the respondent has purchased ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gard to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as stated above and is therefore liable to be set aside. In view of the above I hold that conversion of sarees into designer sarees is not a process of manufacture as per Section 2 (f) of the Act ibid, and such sarees are not changeable to Central Excise duty. Consequently demand of duty, interest and penalties imposed in the impugned order cannot be sustained . 6. We are also in agreement with the finding of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and hold that as the respondent had purchased sarees and did embroidery and hemming work thereon will not change the character of sarees, therefore, the activity undertaken by the respondent does not amount to manufacture as per Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
