1994 (7) TMI 141 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the process undertaken by the party amounted to manufacture.
2. Whether the Anhydrous Dextrose Powder and Dextrose Powder are the same for the purpose of charging duty.
3. Interpretation of Tariff description of Item No. 1E.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Department against an order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, regarding the clearance of Dextrose Powder without duty after re-processing Anhydrous Dextrose Powder. The Collector (Appeals) allowed the appeal, stating that the goods brought in for re-processing and the cleared goods were the same in composition. The processing involved seiving, which was held not to amount to manufacture, and the clearance without duty was protected by Rule 173-H.

2. The Revenue argued that Anhydrous Dextrose Powder was different from Dextrose Powder, justifying the duty imposition based on the difference in forms of dextrose. They relied on previous tribunal decisions to support their stance. In contrast, the respondents contended that the process did not result in a new product and all forms of dextrose were liable to duty under the same tariff entry. They cited relevant case laws to support their argument.

3. The Tribunal considered both parties' submissions and reviewed the records and citations. It was noted that the Anhydrous Dextrose Powder was re-processed and cleared as Dextrose Powder, with a clear finding that the goods were the same in composition. The processing involved seiving to remove lumps due to moisture absorption, which was not considered as manufacturing a new product. The Tribunal referred to a previous case where rejected goods were transformed without changing their characteristics and propriety, leading to a dismissal of duty imposition. Following this analogy and the lack of new product emergence in the present case, the Tribunal upheld the Collector (Appeals) order and dismissed the Department's appeal.

4. Vice President S.K. Bhatnagar emphasized the Tariff description of Item No. 1E, highlighting that it includes glucose in whatever form, explicitly mentioning dextrose monohydrate and anhydrous dextrose. The dextrose powder in question was cleared after simple seiving and moisture removal, without the emergence of a new commodity. Therefore, the order of the Collector was upheld, and the appeal was rejected.