2018 (11) TMI 675

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... esai, Supdt. (AR) for Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D.M. Misra This is an appeal filed against Order-in-Appeal No. SB (133)133/MV/2010 dated 23.11.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-I. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellants had received inputs, namely, S.S. Laser cut sheets from principal manufacturer to carry out the processes, namely, bend .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he processes of bending, welding, buffing etc. do not result in to 'manufacture' of a new product within the definition of manufacture. Hence, the appellant had discharged appropriate Service Tax on the amount received for carrying out the said processes. It is his contention that therefore demanding excise duty on the intermediate product, is untenable in law and cannot be sustained. 4. Learned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dence to support the said observation. Besides, the intermediate product was subjected to further processes at the principal manufacturer's end to convert it into finished excisable goods. 6. In these circumstances, we do not find merit in the impugned order. Accordingly, the same is set aside. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any, in accordance with law. (Operative portion of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X