Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Elantas Beck India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise

2017 (11) TMI 768 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Manufacture - whether the activity of appellant is same as of Ankleshwar Unit - Held that: - the activity of Ankleshwar Unit and the appellants unit are the same such as purchase of short length of bare copper wire enameling the said wire with their final product i.e., varnish. If this be so, then the Tribunal s order passed in respect of Ankleshwar Unit is squarely applicable, as per the direction given by this Tribunal in the first round of appeal - Since the matter has already been considered .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ant Shri. Sanjay Hasija, Supdt. (AR) for respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair 1. The appellants are manufacturer of excisable goods falling under Chapter No.3208.00 of CETA. For the period January 92 to July 94, the departmental investigation allegedly revealed that the appellants were also manufacturing and testing as per ISI specifications, enameled/insulated copper wire, falling under Chapter Heading No.8544.00 of the CETA, 1985, at their factory premises at Pimpri, without maintaining statutory .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/173 to 176/2000 dated 22/09/2000. Revenue being aggrieved by the order-in-appeal, filed appeal with the CEGAT. The CEGAT remanded the case to adjudicating authority vide order No.A/471/WZB/2005/C-III dated 01/04/2005 with direction to determine the facts at Ankleshwar unit, thereafter to decide the issue if they are same as at Pune by applying the Tribunal decision in the case of Ankleshwar unit. The adjudicating authority again confirmed the above mentioned duty demand in the remand proceeding .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-III dated 01/04/2005 wherein a specific direction was given to the adjudicating authority only to ascertain the fact that whether the fact of processing in the Ankleshwar unit and in the appellant s units is same. However, the adjudicating authority gone beyond the direction given by the Tribunal and decided the matter on various other grounds such as the restructure of the tariff and relied on some judgements and distinguished the judgement of this Tribunal passed in respect of Ankleshwar Unit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

heir final products, after preserving the samples of enameled copper wire, the same is cleared as scrap on payment of duty. Therefore, the activity of enameling of copper wire is only for testing of their final product. He submits that even if it is presumed that the activity amounts to manufacture but the goods have taken for quality test it will not be liable for duty. The process of coating of varnish on copper wire is not amount to manufacture, which is supported by various decisions. He rel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s Ltd. 1998 (97) ELT 402 (SC) k) Castings (India) Inc. 2016 (342) ELT 343 (Jhar) 3. Shri Sanjay Hasija, Ld. Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that the appellant is purchasing bare copper wire, which falls under Chapter 74, the appellant carries out the process of enameling of copper wire with varnish. The enameled wire is classifiable under Chapter Heading 85.44 which is distinct from the bare copper wire which falls .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/95/WRB dated 05/12/95 wherein the following order was passed: Shri Singh, the Ld. JDR while supporting the order submits that a distinct item has come into existence and it being marketable by itself, the same attracts duty liability. Considering the submissions made, when the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court referred to above, there does not seem to any scope for whether discussion to establish that the process would not amounts to manufacture. Following the ratio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

spute, the appeal of Revenue is to be allowed as Remand to the original authority with direction to determine the facts at Pune. Thereafter decide the issue if they are same as at Ankleshwar by applying facts the Tribunal decision after hearing the assesee and thereafter pass an order as per law. Cross objection stand disposed of in above terms. 6. On going through both the above Tribunal order, one which is in respect of appellant s Ankleshwar Unit and the second one is a remand order in the ve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as the restructure of the tariff according to which the activity amounts to manufacture and also questioned the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Electricals Ltd. (supra) which was relied upon by the Tribunal in the order passed in respect of Ankleshwar Unit. We find that the order of this Tribunal passed in respect of Ankleshwar Unit has attained finality as no record of challenge to this order. The Tribunal in the present case while remanding the matter given a clear dir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version