TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1986 (6) TMI 192
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....smuch as the said firm had received rusted imported copper coated welding Electrodes (hereinafter referred to as the said goods) falling under Item No.50 of the First Schedule (hereinafter referred to as the said Schedule) to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) of 3.5 mm Diameter weighing 9570 kgs. valued at Rs. 1 lakh from Steel Authority of India, Rourkella for reprocessing. The said goods were de-coppered, pickled and drawn into 3.3 mm weighing 9238 kgs. copper coated and formed into spoons in the factory of the said company as per the contract order No. OVS/P/E3R/98630/90163 dated 7-10-1980. The said firm cleared the said goods without payment of Central Excise duty under cover of G.P.I. in 198....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the year 1980-81 but since the full value of the goods manufactured out of the raw materials supplied by the Steel Authority of India being Rs. 1 lakh shall have to be taken into account for the purpose of computing exemption limit as provided in the Notification No. 80/80-CE., dated 19-6-80, their total clearance value thus arrived at was Rs. 15,26,080.80 and thereby the said firm were not entitled to avail the exemption as provided under Notification No. 80/80-CE., dated 19-6-80 during the year 1981-82 and the said firm are alleged to have evaded payment of duty working out to be Rs.1,63,406.25 (Basic Rs.1,55,625.00 + Spl. Excise Rs.7,781.25) leviable on the said goods falling under Item No.50 of the said Schedule. 2. The said firm were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... They were intimated by a letter dated 6th June, 1985 that their request for a second adjournment could not be acceded to and that they should appear for the hearing on 10th June failing which the case would be decided on the basis of the records available. M/s. Indian Metal Industries did not turn up for the hearing and again sent a letter dated 10th June, 1985 asking for adjournment. The person who brought the letter was requested by Supdt. (Adj.) whether he could attend the hearing and he replied in the negative. 5.1 Since the case could not be decided by the former Collector, Shri N.K. Bajpai, M/s. Indian Metal Industries was granted a fresh hearing before me on 12-6-1986 at 16.00 hrs. Shri P.R. Biswas, Consultant appeared along ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....without payment of duty under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, the extended time limit of 5 years under Section 11A of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 cannot be invoked in this case. Since the show cause notice is dated 18-12-82, i.e. after a lapse of 6 months from the dates of the clearances referred to in the show cause notice, the demand in the show cause notice is hit by the normal limitation of 6 months as well. (b) The interpretation given to Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules 1944 in the show cause notice is perverse and not correct. Rule 173H does not state that the goods received for re-processing should be Central Excise duty paid. All that the Rule requires is that the goods should be duty paid. In the present cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rm. The process of removal of rust, re-drawing and copper coating does not amount to manufacture. (d) The goods in question, viz. copper coated mild steel wire cannot be considered as an electrode under Tariff Item-50 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. In this connection the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Advani Oerlikon (1981 E.L.T. 432) may be referred to. The same judgment has been relied upon by the Special Bench 'D' of CEGAT in the case of M/s. Poonam Trading Company (1983 E.L.T.-2455). 5.3 Shri Biswas submitted that the proceedings initiated by the issue of the misconceived show cause notice in this case may be dropped. 6. I have gone through the records of the case and considered the submissio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....firm received imported rusted copper coated welding electrodes of 3.5 mm. In the reply to show cause notice, the said firm submitted that the goods were rusted copper coated weld wire. In the intimation at the time of re-entry of goods, the goods were described as weld wire. In the Bill of Entry, the goods were also described as welding wire. The Custom House classified the goods under Chapter 73 of the Customs Tariff which corresponded to T.I. 26AA of the Central Excise Tariff. The Custom House charged and recovered countervailing duty under T.I. 26AA of the Central Excise Tariff. At the time of clearance, the goods were described in the G.P.I as weld wire. In view of the above, I consider that the goods in question were classifiable under....