1988 (5) TMI 120 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Classification of goods and rejection of refund claims.

Classification of goods: The appellants received duty paid steel angles, cut them to size, punched and galvanized them for use in constructing steel Power Transmission Towers. The Assistant Collector classified the goods under Tariff Item 68, rejecting the appellants' contention that cutting and processing did not amount to manufacture. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) upheld this classification. The appellants argued that their activities did not constitute manufacture, citing previous tribunal decisions. The Tribunal, referring to past cases, concluded that the activities did not transform the goods into a new commodity, thus classifying them under Tariff Item 26AA.

Refund claims rejection: The appellants filed refund claims totaling Rs. 9,71,953.26, stating that duty under Tariff Item 68 was not applicable as duty under Tariff Item 26AA had already been paid. The Assistant Collector rejected the claims, which were also dismissed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). The Tribunal, after determining the classification of the goods under Tariff Item 26AA, allowed the appeal related to the refund claims, as duty under Item 26AA had already been paid.

Conclusion: The Tribunal held that the appellants' activities did not amount to manufacture, classifying the goods under Tariff Item 26AA. Consequently, the appeal related to classification was allowed, and the appeal concerning refund claims was also allowed due to duty under Item 26AA already being paid. The department's cross objections were deemed disposed of by the same order.