9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 984X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate, For the Appellant Mr. Madhup Saran, AR, For the Respondent Per : V. PADMANABHAN The miscellaneous application is filed by the appellant for early hearing of the appeal, as the duty involved in this case is above Rs. 1 crore and the issue in decided in their favour. The early hearing application is allowed and with the consent of both the parties, the appeal itself is taken up f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our of the assessee's in the case of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. CCE: 2009 (240) ELT 403 (Tri.-Del.), wherein it was held that the activity will not amount to manufacture. 5. We have perused the above decision, wherein the Tribunal has observed as follows: "3. Learned Advocate placed reliance on decision of the Tribunal in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and others v. CCE, Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as to whether the process of blending ordinary MS/HSD with very small quantity of MFAs (0.04 per cent to 0.06 per cent), to make branded MS/HSD amounts to manufacture. After considering the rival contentions on this point, we, for the reasons given below, hold that this process does not amount to 'manufacture' and hence would not attract any Central Excise Duty. 4.1 The MS and HSD after being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nhance the marketability of a product or improve the value addition does not amount to manufacture. In this case, the blending only improves the quality of the MS/HSD resulting in better value addition, without charging the basic characteristics and usages of the products." 4. Following the ratio of the said decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. and others (supr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
