9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (5) TMI 174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asing, C.B. Couplers and Components. The issue for consideration is whether these products are dutiable under Item No. 68 after initially the duty had been paid under Item No. 25(16)(ii) of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. The appellants had contested that they are engaged in the manufacture of castings and the process undertaken by them were incidental and ancillary to the process of casting. The Revenue had taken the view that after casting and after discharging that stage duty, the goods were further processed to make them identifiable parts for use by Railways. According to the Revenue two stage duty is payable : first at the casting stage under Item No. 25 and thereafter under Item No. 68 as goods not elsewhere specified. 3. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... designs and specifications and that the goods were identifiable by their name, designs and specifications. The appellants had submitted a classification and have shown classification of their products under Item No. 25 of the Central Excise Tariff. The Assistant Collector classified the products first as under Item No. 25 and then under Item No. 68. Being aggrieved the appellants had filed an appeal with the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta who had remanded the matter to the Assistant Collector for physical examination over and above the perusal of the records. Thereafter the Assistant Collector visited the premises of the assessee and studied the manufacturing process. He found that after castings the goods were subjected to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the goods as cleared were described as C.S. Buffer Plunger" and C.S. Back Stop . Therefore, casting is the preliminary stages of preparing the finished product. The decision of the Assistant Collector that the products are correctly classifiable under Item 68 at the finished stage is therefore, correct. The appeal is therefore, stands rejected." 8. The learned Advocate had referred to the decisions which have been mentioned above. The law is well settled that if any process which is incidental and ancillary to the process of casting is undertaken then the cast goods will not go out of purview of Item No. 25. When the cast item is taken out of mould there are some foreign material attached to the casting. They had necessarily to be remo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved that the machining and polishing done to remove excess surface skin will not take the goods out of the purview of forged because such machining and polishing is incidental or ancillary to the manufacture of the forged products as per Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The learned Advocate had stated that it was a case where the position has been conceded by the appellants. We, however, consider that the Hon ble Supreme Court had gone into the merits and have given to their independent decision that in a case where rough machined casting are subjected to precision machining then two stage duty, first as casting and then under Item No. 68 was leviable. 9. There is nothing on record to show that the goods as supplied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
