9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (9) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese appeals filed by the Revenue are that the respondents manufactured tooth brushes falling under Tariff Item 68 at the relevant time. They received raw materials viz. bristles handles, cartons and cellophone from their customers and manufactured tooth brushes. They paid duty on the value of the tooth brushes. Subsequently they applied for refund of part of the excise duty paid by them on the ground that they were entitled to the benefit of paying duty on labour charges only in terms of Notification No.119/75-CE. They lodged 3 refund claims covering the periods4.6.l978 to 30.7.1978, 6.8.1978 to 29.9.1978 and 4.2.1979 to 27,2.1979. The Assistant Collector rejected the refund claims holding that the respondents not having claimed the benefi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... completely new article viz. the tooth brushes. He submitted that the notification contemplated the extension of the concession as, mentioned in the explanation to the notification, only where an article intended to undergo manufacturing process is supplied to the worker and that article is returned toy the job worker to the supplier after the article has undergone the incidental manufacturing process. He underlined the fact that each of the parts of the tooth brush supplied to the respondents are not returned after some process on each of them, but it is only tooth brushes, an entirely different commodity, that is returned. 7. In support of his arguments, the learned JDR relied upon a judgment of the Tribunal (Larger Bench) in National Or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ipso facto is no ground to rule out the benefit and that, therefore, it has to be considered what would be the nature of the activity that would be comprehended within the explanation to the notification as job work. 9. Applying the ratio of the Tribunal s judgment in NOCIL (supra) to the facts of these appeals we find that the appellants made out a very good case for setting aside the impugned order of the Collector (Appeals). In these appeals what took place is not a process incidental or ancillary to the completion of a product but manufacture of a new product. Besides, the various articles received by the respondents were in no case returned to the customers after some process on such articles but were used up in the manufacture of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
