1988 (9) TMI 148

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....we heard the JDR and examined the papers. 3. Briefly the facts giving rise to these appeals filed by the Revenue are that the respondents manufactured tooth brushes falling under Tariff Item 68 at the relevant time. They received raw materials viz. bristles handles, cartons and cellophone from their customers and manufactured tooth brushes. They paid duty on the value of the tooth brushes. Subsequently they applied for refund of part of the excise duty paid by them on the ground that they were entitled to the benefit of paying duty on labour charges only in terms of Notification No.119/75-CE. They lodged 3 refund claims covering the periods4.6.l978 to 30.7.1978, 6.8.1978 to 29.9.1978 and 4.2.1979 to 27,2.1979. The Assistant Collector rej....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ceived various parts of the tooth brushes and then assembled them and manufactured a completely new article viz. the tooth brushes. He submitted that the notification contemplated the extension of the concession as, mentioned in the explanation to the notification, only where an article intended to undergo manufacturing process is supplied to the worker and that article is returned toy the job worker to the supplier after the article has undergone the incidental manufacturing process. He underlined the fact that each of the parts of the tooth brush supplied to the respondents are not returned after some process on each of them, but it is only tooth brushes, an entirely different commodity, that is returned. 7. In support of his arguments....