1987 (7) TMI 381

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e "manufacture" of "Chewing tobacco", a manufactured tobacco product, falling under item No. 4 II(5) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule (CET, for short). It is stated for the appellant that there is no addition of scent or any other ingredient. The lower authorities have held that the aforesaid processes resulted in the manufacture of chewing tobacco, and, on that basis, rejected the appellant's claim for refund of duty paid on clearance of such tobacco. 2. We have heard Shri P.S. Nagarathnam, Consultant, for the appellants and Shri Vineet Kumar, Sr. D.R., for the respondent. 3. Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, defines "manufacture" as including any process incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ingredient is added to the subject product. The department has not disputed this statement. We may also note that many Collectors have issued trade notices to the effect that cut tobacco which is apparently unmanufactured leaf merely cut and tied or held together with a string or ring bearing some sort of a brand label would not be treated as manufactured tobacco (Cochin Collector's Notice No.41/78, dated 4.2.1978; Baroda Collector's Notice No. 38/77, dated 31.10.1977; Pune Collector's Notice No.208/78, dated 23.11.1978, Madras Collector's Circular No.14/78, dated 27.12.1978). It is clear, therefore, that from the department's own point of view which, we consider proper, the appellant's product ought not be considered as chewing tobacco, a....