9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufactured are Lead Sub-Oxide and Litharge and the raw material supplied is Lead ingots. The lower authorities have held that the benefit of Notification 119/75 is not available to the appellants because they manufacture a totally new article out of the goods supplied by the customers. 2. Shri J.S. Agarwal, Advocate appears on behalf of the appellants and submits that there is already substantial case law in support of the appellant s stand that emergence of a new product is no bar to availing of the benefit of Notification No. 119/75. In this connection, he has cited the following decisions: 1. 1983 E.L.T. 876 - Associated Pigments Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise Other. 2. 1986 (24) E.L.T. 113 - Bombay Food Pvt. Limited v. C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a new product by itself is no bar to claim the benefit of Notification No. 119/75. However, the concensus of the decisions on the issue is that while each case has to be dealt with on facts and decided on its own merits, the claim to benefit of Notification No. 119/75 can legitimately be made only when the article entrusted by the customer, after the application of the manufacture process by the job worker, does not lose its essential identity entirely. This point is further elaborated in the Tribunal s decision in the case of Waldies Ltd. (supra) in which it has been held that what is intended is that job work should be small, to bring the manufacturing initially undertaken to a completion. It was held in this case that the conversion o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was a case where chlorine supplied by the customers on reaction with ethylene of the appellants (who claimed to be job worker) had resulted in emergence of vinyl chloride and other by-products, in all of which chlorine in some form was present but the identity of chlorine as such had been lost. The Tribunal held that in such a case benefit of job work within the meaning of Explanation appended to Notification 119/75-C.E. dated 30-4-1975 would not be available. In coming to this conclusion in preference to other High Court decisions the Tribunal had relied on certain observations made by Madras High Court in M/s. Madura Coats Limited case (1982 E.L.T. 370) as seen from para 10 of the Tribunal s order (supra). Following this 5 Member Bench d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
