2015 (1) TMI 722

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as requested for adjournment. Learned Senior Advocate Shri D.B. Shroff, appearing on behalf of the appellant, as per instructions from his client mentions that the appellant has not engaged any other Advocate except him. Accordingly, learned Senior Advocate proceeds to argue the matter. 3. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, I find that appellant is engaged in the manufacture of Pencil classifiable under Chapter heading 96.09 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They engaged M/s. Patel Stationers Pvt. Limited as a Job Worker for manufacturing Pencil Lead, which is also classifiable under heading 96.09. The said job worker, M/s. Patel Stationers Pvt. Limited prepared mixture of natural Graphite and natural Bentoni .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fund claim on merits and had not given any findings on unjust-enrichment. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that appellant purchased the Pencil Lead, who has not filed any evidence on unjust-enrichment as the duty incidence was borne by them. 5. I find that the Tribunal in the case of Umesh Pencil Processors Pvt. Limited (supra) held that mixture of natural Graphite and natural Bentonite (clay) would not amount to manufacture. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below:-              4. The ld. SDR on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the appellant enjoyed full exemption under Entry .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... no consequence. The relevant portion of the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of United Phosphorus Ltd. is reproduced below :-           4. In the case at hand the Collector (Appeals) has found that the above said three intermediate products came into existence at a certain stage of a multiple stage integrated chemical process leading to the final products and therefore they could not be held to be goods as understood in commercial parlance because they were not marketable. The department had failed in showing if any facility existed for separation of the said three products and whether in the form in which the said three products came into existence in the reaction process were .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X