9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (5) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stitute manufacture and whether the products so obtained fall under T.I. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff or continue to fall under T.I. 26AA ibid, and the date from which the respondents should get relief in case the Order-in-Appeal is upheld by the Tribunal. 2. Facts as found from the arguments and also from the record are that on 31-8-1977/2-9-1977, the Superintendent of Central Excise, Assessment Group `D , Pune-2 Division communicated the decision of the Assistant Collector of Central Excise to the respondent. The Assistant Collector, Central Excise had decided that conversion of Steel Tubes into drilling rods and casing tubes would constitute manufacture under T.I. 68 and the processes of conversion would not constitute job work. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hile Shri V. Lakshmi Kumaran has urged that the processes of conversion of the steel tubes into drilling rods and casing tubes, cutting them into appropriate sizes brings into existence an identifiable new product, Shri Vahanvati has seriously controverted this contention. He has relied on Government of India decision in the case of Teams India in Order-in-Revision No. 255-B, dated 24-6-1982, 1982 E.L.T. 481. 5. We do not think that merely threading and cutting into pieces of seamless tubes and pipes can be said to bring into existence a new identifiable product distinct in name, character and use. We agree with the learned Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) that no new taxable article comes into existence, and tubes still remain clas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be limited to the respondent only from 9-5-1979 and in any case not earlier to a period beyond 6 months from 3-4-1979 i.e. respondent s letter on which the Assistant Collector took decision dated 8-5-1979. 7. At one stage, the learned Counsel for the respondents was agreeable to this relief with qualification that benefit of job work Notification for the earlier period should be given to the respondent but later he retracted this concession. We have mentioned this argument only to reject the same, on the ground that this argument before us is premature. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay allowed the appeal with consequential relief which is yet to be worked out by the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise after taking into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
