CESTAT rules cutting jumbo rolls not manufacturing.

The Appellate Tribunal, CESTAT, Ahmedabad, rejected the Revenue's appeal regarding the process of cutting and slitting jumbo rolls of insulated tape, affirming that such activity does not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal relied on established legal precedents related to various commodities and concluded that cutting and slitting jumbo rolls into smaller rolls does not constitute manufacturing, regardless of the specific type of goods involved. The respondent's Cross Objection was also disposed of in line with this decision.

---

---

Issues involved: Determination of whether the process of cutting and slitting jumbo rolls of insulated tape amounts to manufacture.

The Commissioner (Appeals) held in favor of the respondent, citing various case laws related to different commodities such as Tissue Paper, Aluminum Foils, Electrical Insulator, Graphic Art Film, Cinematographic Films, and Insulating Material. It was established that merely cutting and slitting jumbo rolls into smaller rolls does not constitute manufacture. The Commissioner found the present case to be covered by the aforementioned case laws and concluded that cutting/slitting of PVC Electrical Insulating tapes does not amount to manufacture. The adjudicating authority did not provide specific findings on this aspect. The issue was deemed no longer res integra and had been decided by a series of judgments referenced by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal determined that the same legal principles applied to the current case, regardless of the specific type of goods involved, as the activity of cutting and slitting remained consistent across different materials.

The Appellate Tribunal, CESTAT, Ahmedabad, rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue based on the established legal precedents. The Cross Objection filed by the respondent was also disposed of accordingly.

---