9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (7) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation 119/75-CE, dated 30-4-1975. In respect of one of the customers namely M/s J.K. Batteries, the respondents used cadmium in the manufacture of zinc calots. The calots contained 99.6% of zinc, 0.35% of lead and 0.05% of cadmium. The zinc and lead were supplied by M/s J.K. Batteries. The period in issue is from 26-12-1975 to 25-12-1976. The respondents paid duty under Notification 120/75-CE on the invoice value which took into a/c the cost of cadmium besides the conversion charges. A show cause notice was issued on 27-4-1979 alleging that the product cleared was different from the goods given for job work and that the respondent have suppressed the materials. In their reply, the respondents urged that they undertook the work purely as job ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . V. Lakshmi Kumaran, Ld. counsel for the appellants urged that the respondents received raw-materials namely, zinc and lead from their customers M/s J.K. Batteries and that they added cadmium 0.05% for the purpose of manufacturing zinc calots. He stated that the identity of the article supplied by the customers did not undergo any change. The intended process of manufacture was to make an alloy of zinc cadmium and lead as per the customer s specification and convert them to calots. The respondents have opted for payment of duty on the invoice value under Notification 120/75-CE which had included the cost of cadmium. He further urged that, in any event, the show cause notice was issued on 27-4-1979 raising a demand for the period from 26-12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from which the calots were punched out. The Asstt. Collector has stated that there was no connection between the raw material supplied for the job and the processed articles. The Tribunal in 1985 ECR 2188 [Bombay Foods (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Bombay] had an occasion to consider the identical issue. After referring to number of judgments on the issue, the Tribunal referred to Anup Engg. [1978 (2) E.L.T. J533] wherein it is stated that the Notification itself contemplated manufacturing process and observing that the manufacture does result in some change in the material; otherwise, it would not be manufacture within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act and held, that the view of the excise authority to the effect that in case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... job work under Notification No. 119/75-CE and their relation to these calots made by Union Carbide. But, the merits of this dispute cannot be investigated since the demand is a afflicted by a serious malady malady that destroys it. 11. The department appeal said there was suppression of facts by the company to avoid payment of duty. But the Assistant Collector does not say so and he arrives at no findings that suppression caused the loss of duty. And the testimony of this is the absence of any chastisement in the shape of a penalty as I expect to be meted out whenever any person deceives the custodians of the law to make wrongful gain for himself. I am not able to accept a report of suppression or deception if the adjudicator under Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
