9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (1) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh Speed Steel Bars are used for manufacture of cutting tools. The cutting tools manufactured out of these tool bits fall under Teriff Item No. 51A(iii) and accordingly duty of excise is levied on the tools so manufactured under Teriff Item No. 51A(iii). The tool bits obtained by cutting High Speed Steel Bars which are hardened by process of heat treatment are nothing else but iron rods cut to different length. Due to misconception, these tool bit (blanks) are being classified by the appellants under Tariff Item No. 68. The fact, however, remains that cutting, grinding, heat treatment and cleaning are processes not amounting to manufacture. In short, the steel rods imported by the appellants remain the same and there is no conversion thereo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... treatment, cleaning and packing operations. It is submitted that the Tool Bits are only hardened blanks of different sizes and they cannot be used by the customers in the condition supplied by the appellants. In order to use these tool bits, the customer has to grind the required cutting angles depending upon his usage and then alone, tool bits can be used for cutting any metal. The so called manufacturing process done by the appellants is only cutting, grinding, heat treatment, cleaning and packing operations. Cutting, grinding, cleaning and packing operations would not obviously change the name of the material. Even so far as heat treatment is concerned, such treatment may, no doubt, have the effect of hardening the steel and would, to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 336) (S.C.). (7) Gonterman Peipers (India) Limited reported in 1986 (26) E.L.T. 471 (Cal.). 7. In response, learned DR further stated that the Tribunal s orders cited by the appellants relate specifically to facts of cited cases and do not have a bearing on the issue before us as these are not applicable to the facts invoived in the present case. 8. It was his contention that the learned Collector (Appeals) has rightly relied upon the Tribunal s order reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1170 (CEGAT). The A.C. has correctly classified the item under Tariff Item 68 and learned Collector has rightly upheld that order. 9. We have considered the above submissions. We observe that learned Counsel s contentions have grea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
