1983 (12) TMI 303 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Assessment of Central Excise duty on the value of manufactured product, application of Notification No. 119/75, significance of materials supplied by job worker, labor and power usage in manufacturing process.

Analysis:

1. Assessment of Central Excise Duty: The case involved a dispute regarding the assessment of Central Excise duty on the value of the manufactured product, starting resistors. The appellant contended that they had initially paid duty on the job work value but later faced a demand for duty on the entire value of the resistors. The argument centered around whether duty should be levied on the job work value or the final product value.

2. Application of Notification No. 119/75: The appellant relied on the case of M/s. Madura Coats v. Union of India to argue that duty should be levied only on the job work value when materials are supplied to the job worker. The Departmental Representative, however, argued that the materials supplied by the appellants played a substantial role in the manufacturing process, disqualifying them from the exemption under Notification No. 119/75.

3. Significance of Materials Supplied: The Departmental Representative emphasized the substantial value and importance of the materials supplied by the appellants in the manufacturing process. The Tribunal agreed with this assessment, noting that the appellants provided labor, expertise, and a significant proportion of raw materials, without evidence to the contrary.

4. Labor and Power Usage: An argument regarding the number of workers and absence of power usage in the manufacturing process was raised by the appellant. However, since this issue was not raised before the Collector of Central Excise and lacked evidence, the Tribunal did not delve into this matter, ultimately dismissing the appeal based on the other considerations.

Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the Appellate order of the Central Board of Excise & Customs, dismissing the appeal of the appellant. The decision was based on the significant role played by the appellants in supplying materials and labor for the manufacturing process, leading to the imposition of Central Excise duty on the value of the final product.