1996 (7) TMI 298 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Determining duty chargeable on yarn at spindle stage or after winding, doubling, reeling.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the point at which duty should be charged on cotton yarn - whether at the spindle stage or after additional processes like winding, doubling, and reeling. The department contended that duty should be levied at the spindle stage when single ply yarn comes into existence, while the respondents argued that duty should be collected after the yarn undergoes further processes. The respondents claimed that the process of manufacture, as per Section 2(f), is only complete when the yarn has a definite identity, which includes winding, doubling, reeling, and bundling. They also argued that common parlance recognizes yarn in various forms, and in their case, duty should be charged when the yarn is fully manufactured, packed, and stored. The duty point was crucial as it affected the revenue loss due to yarn wastage during additional processes.

The learned SDR representing the department asserted that duty is applicable when yarn is created as single ply at the spindle stage, and any subsequent processes leading to yarn loss should not shift the duty collection point. The duty, as per Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, is imposed on goods produced or manufactured. The tribunal noted that the tariff entry did not specify single or double ply yarn, but only referred to cotton yarn. It was established that single ply yarn is commercially recognized and treated as goods at the spindle stage, making it liable for duty. The tribunal analyzed whether winding, doubling, and reeling could be considered processes incidental to yarn manufacture. It was concluded that these processes occur after the spindle stage, where single ply yarn is considered manufactured goods, and hence, do not impact the duty point determination.

After considering the arguments and legal provisions, the tribunal held that duty should be charged on single ply yarn at the spindle stage. The decision was based on the recognition of single ply yarn as a marketable product at the spindle stage, aligning with the common parlance test for goods. The tribunal emphasized that previous decisions on doubling of yarn were not relevant to the current case, as they pertained to processes after the spindle stage. Consequently, the tribunal upheld the order of the Asstt. Collector and allowed the appeals in favor of the department.