Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2002 (10) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... onfiscated the seized goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine, holding that the activity undertaken by them amounts to manufacture and a distinct commodity namely, rough shape and section emerges. 2. Shri B.N. Chattopadhaya, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants are carrying on business primarily in die-press forging of cut out pieces of duty paid brass rods; that the rough forged brass lumps are used in the manufacture of gas cylinders valves, amongst others at the customers end; that manufacturers all over India had, over the years, been clearing rough forged brass lumps without payment of duty since these were not considered to be excisable goods; that enquiry made by the appellants revealed that C.C.E., .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... been carried out, the benefit of Notification No. 119/75 will be available. The Tribunal also held that brass rods sent for manufacture of forged nuts and valve body forged and machined on job basis have not lost their essential identity, the same being kept in tact, after the intended manufacturing process has been carried out. 3. The learned Advocate also contended that the demand for the period from April 1983 to 16-10-85 made under show cause notice dated 31-12-1986 is time-barred as there was no misrepresentation or suppression of facts; that from very inception of the unit, the operation undertaken by them was within the knowledge of the jurisdictional officers; that it was an established position that materials at their unit being .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wire/bars from the market which were cut into sizes and forged by press forging using dies and punches to form the forged product of solid sections other than round, rectangular, square and hexagonal in shapes; that they also received copper/brass scrap from their customers which was converted into bars/rods out of which the impugned products falling under erstwhile Tariff Item 26A 3(ii) were manufactured; that as a distinct item wrought shapes and sections emerged after the manufacturing process, the processes undertaken by them amounted to manufacture and their plea that the products were rough forged lumps of brass without any specific name and character is not correct and tenable. The learned SDR also submitted that after the manufact .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he present matter. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The duty of excise is leviable on goods manufactured or produced in India. The appellants have not disputed the processes undertaken by them as detailed in the impugned order. According to them the products which emerge after processing by them is rough forged brass lumps whereas the Revenue treats them as wrought shapes and sections classifiable under Tariff Item 26A (3) (ii) of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. It is admitted fact that the appellants are engaged primarily in die-press forging of cut-out pieces of brass rods. The methods of forging have been discussed in The Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel Edited by Harold E. Mc Gannok, published b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le at the time of hearing and it was apparent that the same was neither round, rectangular nor square and hexagonal. We, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the findings of the Adjudicating Authority that a distinct item has emerged after the manufacturing process which is excisable. 6. In the present matter the demand of duty has been confirmed for the period from April, 1983 to 16-10-1985 and the show cause notice was issued on 31-12-1986 by invoking the extended period of limitation as provided under proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act. The extended period of limitation is invocable as the fact of manufacture was not brought to the notice of the Department as neither any Central Excise licence was obtained nor a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates