1999 (5) TMI 135 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Determination of whether the process of slitting, cutting, rewinding, and packing jumbo rolls of aluminum foils to produce smaller size foils known as 'house foils' amounts to manufacture under the Central Excise Tariff.

Summary:
The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi considered two appeals against two orders-in-appeal dealing with a common subject of whether the process in question amounts to manufacture. The key issue was whether the activities involved in the process result in a new and distinct product.

The appellant argued that the process goes beyond mere slitting and cutting as it involves shaping the foils to desired width and length, rewinding, and packing. They contended that the resulting product, 'house foils,' has a distinct identity in the market and is recognized as such by buyers.

The appellant cited precedents where similar activities were held to amount to manufacture, emphasizing the emergence of new marketable products with distinct identities.

On the other hand, the respondent argued that cutting and slitting alone may not constitute manufacture, citing cases where such processes were not considered manufacturing activities. They emphasized that the change in style does not necessarily create a new product.

After considering the arguments and reviewing the records, the Tribunal applied the test of whether the product has a new and distinct identity from the original material. They found that the 'house foils' resulting from the process had a unique market identity and were distinct from the jumbo rolls of aluminum foils.

Drawing parallels with previous judgments and applying the test of new identity and market recognition, the Tribunal concluded that the process indeed amounted to manufacture. Therefore, the order-in-appeal was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief as per law.