2001 (6) TMI 336 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

The case involved the interpretation of the term "chamfering" in relation to manufacturing cast copper articles. The department argued that chamfering made the articles unfit for a specific benefit, but the Commissioner ruled in favor of the assessee, equating chamfering with grinding. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, stating that chamfering did not automatically amount to bevelling, and the absence of a specific machine for bevelling supported the assessee's position. The appeal was dismissed.