Limitation and manufacture on rough castings: absence of service proof saved the appeal and Modvat credit was upheld.

In the absence of proof that the order-in-appeal had been served on the assessee, limitation could not be computed against it; the appeal filed shortly after receipt of the copy was therefore treated as within time. On the substantive issue, the processes carried out on rough castings were held not to amount to manufacture, following the Tribunal's earlier decision in the assessee's own case. As manufacture was not established, denial of Modvat credit was not justified. The reliefs flowing from the order were accordingly available to the assessee.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appeal suffered from an inordinate delay or, on the materials placed, the order-in-appeal could be treated as served only on 2-2-2007; (ii) whether the processes carried out on the rough castings amounted to manufacture and whether Modvat credit could be denied.

Issue (i): Whether the appeal suffered from an inordinate delay or, on the materials placed, the order-in-appeal could be treated as served only on 2-2-2007.

Analysis: The record did not show proof of service of the order-in-appeal on the appellant. In the absence of evidence from the department and in view of the copy supplied only on 2-2-2007, the appeal filed on 5-2-2007 could not be treated as delayed.

Conclusion: The delay objection was rejected and the appeal was treated as within time.

Issue (ii): Whether the processes carried out on the rough castings amounted to manufacture and whether Modvat credit could be denied.

Analysis: The issue was covered by the Tribunal's earlier decision in the appellant's own case, where similar operations on components and rough castings were held not to amount to manufacture and denial of Modvat credit was negatived. The same reasoning applied to the present facts.

Conclusion: The processes did not amount to manufacture and Modvat credit could not be denied.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the assessee obtained the reliefs flowing from the order.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of proof of service of the appellate order, limitation cannot be computed against the appellant; and where the issue is already covered by binding co-ordinate reasoning, operations on rough castings that do not bring about manufacture cannot justify denial of Modvat credit.

---