Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether mica mined in lump form, after cleaning, cutting to size and grading for sale, becomes a manufactured product liable to central excise duty under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff.
Analysis: Liability under section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 arises only when excisable goods are produced or manufactured. The statutory definition of manufacture in section 2(f) includes only those processes that are incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product. Mica in lump form, though subjected to cleaning, cutting and grading for marketing, does not thereby acquire a new identity, character or marketable substance distinct from the mined mica. Such treatment is only for making the goods marketable and does not amount to manufacture. Fabricated mica stands on a different footing because fabrication or punching may involve a manufacturing process.
Conclusion: Treatment of block mica for marketing did not amount to manufacture and it was not liable to central excise duty on that basis; the revision application was allowed to that extent.
Ratio Decidendi: Mere cleaning, cutting, grading or similar treatment undertaken only to make an article marketable does not constitute manufacture unless a new and distinct product comes into existence.