2013 (5) TMI 342 - AT - Central Excise

Repacking of goods - Maize Starch - deemed manufacture - Held that - In the case of Riddhi Siddi Gluco Biols Ltd Vs CCE 2011 (4) TMI 970 - CESTAT, BANGALORE has held that Maize Starch is correctly classifiable under Chapter 11. Thus, the activity of repacking would not amount to manufacture. Thus, grant of unconditional stay and remand the matter to Additional Commissioner to decide the present matter after the dispute of classification at the end of M/s Anil Products attains finality.

Summary

Issues: Classification of Maize Starch under Chapter 11 or Chapter 35, Deemed manufacture in repacking activity, Finality of dispute at the end of M/s Anil Products

Classification of Maize Starch: The dispute revolved around the correct classification of Maize Starch, with the Revenue contending it should be classified under Chapter 35 while the appellants argued for Chapter 11. The Tribunal noted the confusion arising from the Chapter Note to Chapter 35 regarding the deemed status of manufacture in repacking activities. The Commissioner's order classified the product under Chapter 35, which was challenged and remanded multiple times, leading to pending proceedings at the adjudicating authority level. The Tribunal referenced a previous case where Maize Starch was classified under Chapter 11, indicating that if so, repacking would not constitute manufacture.

Deemed Manufacture in Repacking Activity: The Tribunal analyzed whether the repacking of Maize Starch constituted manufacture, emphasizing that if the product was correctly classified under Chapter 11, repacking would not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal considered the absence of a Chapter Note confirming deemed manufacture in such repacking activities and highlighted the relevance of the classification of Maize Starch in determining the manufacturing status of the repacking process.

Finality of Dispute at the end of M/s Anil Products: The Tribunal emphasized that the dispute's resolution at the end of M/s Anil Products was crucial in determining the appellants' liability for repacking activities. Noting the ongoing proceedings and lack of finality in the classification dispute at M/s Anil Products, the Tribunal granted unconditional stay, setting aside the impugned order, and remanding the matter to the Additional Commissioner of Central Excise. The Tribunal directed the decision to be made after the dispute's finality at M/s Anil Products, effectively disposing of the stay petition and appeal in this manner.