1996 (2) TMI 247 - AT - Central Excise

Conversion of granules to powder: CEGAT ruling on manufacturing under Chapter 39 pre-1988

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY Versus BRIGHT BROS. LTD.

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY Versus BRIGHT BROS. LTD. - 1996 (84) E.L.T. 83 (Tribunal) Issues:- Determination of whether the conversion of granules into powder form amounts to manufacture under Chapter 39 prior to 1-3-1988.Analysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi involved a dispute regarding the classification of the conversion of granules into powder form under Chapter 39 before 1-3-1988. The Revenue argued that the conversion should be considered as manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, based on Chapter Note 6 of Chapter 39. They contended that even prior to the amendment, the conversion of one primary form into another primary form amounted to manufacture. On the other hand, the respondents argued that the conversion did not amount to manufacture before 1-3-1988, citing Chapter Note 3 of Chapter 39 which specified that certain goods under Chapter Heading 39.01 required chemical synthesis. They emphasized that powder produced through pulverization did not fall under this category before the mentioned date.The Tribunal examined the provisions of Chapter Note 6 and Chapter Note 3 of Chapter 39 before the amendment on 1-3-1988. Chapter Note 6 explicitly stated that the conversion of one primary form into another primary form would amount to manufacture, encompassing various forms such as powders, granules, and flakes. The Tribunal rejected the argument that powder produced through pulverization was not a product of chemical synthesis, highlighting that moulding powder itself originated from chemical synthesis. The Tribunal noted that the subsequent amendment on 1-3-1988 clarified that such conversions would indeed amount to manufacture, emphasizing that the amendment merely made explicit what was implicit in the statute.Furthermore, the Tribunal dismissed the contention that the conversion resulted in a different primary form not specified under Chapter Note 6, as granules being converted into powder fell squarely under Chapter Note 6(b). The Tribunal concluded that the conversion of granules into powder form should be considered as manufacture under Chapter 39, allowing the Revenue's appeal and setting aside the previous order.In summary, the Tribunal's decision hinged on the interpretation of Chapter Note 6 and Chapter Note 3 of Chapter 39 before the 1-3-1988 amendment, ultimately ruling in favor of the Revenue by deeming the conversion of granules into powder as constituting manufacture under the relevant provisions.