9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S/Shri V. Laxmi Kumaran, Ravi Raghavan and A. Jaju, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri H.K. Thakur, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: Rakesh Kumar, Member (T)]. - This is a common order in respect of Appeals No. E/161-163 of 2006, E/637 of 06, E/2024 of 07, E/3470-71 of 06, E/3632-33 of 06, E/1399 of 07, E/988 of 07, E/458 of 07 and E/2864 of 07 filed by M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (HPCL), M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. (BPCL) and M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL) against orders passed by CCE, Delhi-I and CCE, Rohtak. The last two appeals i.e. appeal No. E/458 of 07 and E/2864 of 07 had been listed today for waiver of pre-deposit, while the remaining appeals had been listed for regular he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , have confirmed the duty demands under Section11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 along with interest on duty under Section 11AB of the Act and have imposed penalty on the Appellants under Section 11AC of the Act. 3. Heard both the sides. 3.1 Shri V. Laxmi Kumaran, Advocate, the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the Appellants made the following submissions :- (i) Blending ordinary MS and HSD with small quantity-0.04% to 0.06% of multi-function additives (MFA) does not result in emergence any new product with distinct name, character and uses. The branded MS and HSD remain MS and HSD only. The MFA in the branded MS or HSD only improves the engine performance but does not change the basic character of the products. Hence, pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f this judgment is applicable to the facts of these cases. 3.2 Shri H.K. Thakur, the learned Jt. CDR made the following submissions :- (i) The additives added to MS/HSD perform the function of removing the carbon deposits from the engine as well as preventing the formation of carbon deposits and thereby improving the efficiency of the engine. Therefore the branded MS/HSD have name, character and use different from the unbranded MS/HSD. (ii) Tribunal in case of Collector of Customs, Madras v. Air Control System, reported in 1988 (33) E.L.T. 568, has held that blending of very small quantity of "Sodium Hexa metaphosphate" with Polytetra fluorethylene (PTFE), an antifriction substance, also known as Tephguard, which is essential fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usage also remain the same. Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in case of CCE v. Sudarshan Chemical Industries (supra) and this Tribunal in its judgments in cases of Lakme Lever Ltd. v. CCE (supra) and CCE v. Mysore Ammonia Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that a process or treatment to enhance the marketability of a product or improve the value addition does not amount to manufacture. In this case, the blending only improves the quality of the MS/HSD resulting in better value addition, without charging the basic characteristics and usages of the products. 4.2 The ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in case of J.G. Glass v. UOI (supra) in which it was held that printing of glass bottles does not amount to manufac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment in case of Collector of Customs, Madras v. Air Control System, Madras, wherein Tribunal has held that blending of Sodium Hexa metaphosphate with Polytetra fluorethylene (PTFE) amounts to manufacture is not applicable to the facts of this case. The issue involved in the case of M/s. Air Control System was as to whether PTFE, which is an anti-friction oil, is a raw material, importable under open general import licence. The contention of Customs Authorities in that case was that it is a finished product. It is in this context that the Tribunal observing that since PTFE is sold only after blending with small quantity of Sodium Hexa Metaphosphate which is dispersal agent and without which it is not usable, held that the blending of PT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
