2008 (9) TMI 16 - SC - Central Excise

Manufacture Conversion of shikakai pods in to Shikakai powder by crushing since SCN has not even alleged that the assessee is engaged in the manufacture of Shikakai powder by crushing shikakai pods and 'Reeta' being mixed, then the entire adjudication stands derailed - merely powdering shikakai pods not amount to manufacture if no any herbal material is added therein - Department should examine the manufacturing process property revenue appeal dismissed

Summary

Issues involved:
Failure to examine manufacturing process in excisability cases; Alleged manufacture of Shikakai powder without proper investigation; Lack of specific allegations in show cause notice; Discrepancy regarding use of 'Reeta' in the powder.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court highlighted the recurring issue of the Department failing to insist on examining the manufacturing process in excisability cases, despite previous observations. In the present case, the respondent-assessee was found to be manufacturing Shikakai powder by crushing shigekai pods and 'Reeta' mixed in a specific ratio. However, the show cause notice did not even allege this manufacturing process, leading to a derailment of the entire adjudication process. The mixing of 'Reeta' has been legally established as constituting manufacture in various judgments, but the respondent-assessee denied adding any herbal material, claiming to only powder shigekai pods. The adjudication authority also neglected to examine the process of converting pods into powder, further complicating the matter.

The Court acknowledged other cases involving the mixture of 'Reeta' into Shikakai powder, but clarified that this was not the situation in the present case. Due to the lack of specific allegations in the show cause notice and the absence of clear findings regarding the use of 'Reeta' in the powder, the Court declined to interfere in the present case. It was emphasized that cases where 'Reeta' is added to the powder are distinct and were not being commented upon in this judgment. Consequently, the Civil Appeals were dismissed without any order as to costs, maintaining a clear stance based on the specific circumstances of the case.