TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (4) TMI 223
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sue namely the import of Hop pellets and whether such imports are eligible under OGL under the Import policy 1985-88 is involved. They are taken up together for disposal. 3. In Customs Appeal No. 522/88/MAS the appellants MK Fisheries imported a consignment of Hop pellets valued at Rs. 1,08,615.22 for which they filed two Bills of Entry (B/E) on 14-9-1987 in the Cochin Customs House for clearance and claimed that the import of the goods was covered by OGL Appendix 6 Item No. 1 which covers raw material, components, and consumables other than those included in Appendices 2, 3 Part A, 5 and 8. The Customs House, however, was of the view that the imported item namely Hop pellets will be covered by Serial No. 13 in Appendix 2 Part B of the I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he impugned order dated 18-4-1988 allowing the application for review of the Collector of Customs, Cochin and directed the Department to initiate penal action against the appellants Metro Exports as the goods are not available for auction. 5. Shri S.D. Nankani, the learned Counsel represented both the appellants. It was his contention that Hop pellets are not covered by Serial No.13 of Appendix 2 Part B. On the other hand it was the contention of the appellants that Brewery hops are agricultural produces and Hop pellets are manufactured from Brewery Hops which serve as a raw-material for use in the manufacture of finished product namely Hop Pellets and as such Brewery Hops and Hop Pellets cannot be treated as one and the same. The learne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etter of credit for the import has been opened much earlier on 16-6-1986. The amendment was to add the words "in any form". 6. Shri K.K. Bhatia, the learned S.D.R. appearing for the Department contended that item No. 13 in Appendix 2, Part B is an inclusive definition of wider coverage. He also referred to the literature produced by the appellants that hops are used in the Brewery. Industry which are described as dried female flower Clusters of the common Hop. There is no substance in the plea of the appellants according to the learned S.D.R. that Hop Pallets are manufactured products because in pelletising process no change to bring about a new product occurs; it is a change in the form of the product only. The Infirmities pointed out i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellants, it is described as "During production of Hopstabil pellets, the raw hops are cleaned, carefully dried, milled and homogenized a number of times". "Extract and powder from the same batch are converted into a homogeneous product in a newly developed plant, carefully pelletized, cooled and conveyed to the packaging department via homogenizing coils". In this connection, it is also useful to bear in mind certain judicial pronouncements as regards what would constitute manufacture. The Supreme Court had occassion to deal with the issue in the case of Union of India v. Delhi Cloth and General Mills reported 1977 E.L.T. (J 199) (S.C.) and South Bihar Sugar Mills v. Union of India reported in 1978 E.L.T. (J 336) (S.C.). It was held that....