TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (1) TMI 192
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "dough moulding compound" out of duty paid polyester resins and glass fibres. A sample was tested by the Chemical Examiner, Madras, with the following results :- "The sample is in the form of pinkish colour fibrous hard lumps and powder. It is composed of synthetic resin (phenolic), inorganic fillers and cellulosic fibres. It is seen from the books on the subject that phenolic moulding compounds are used in making various types of decorative, mechanical, electrical and other parts and articles. Hence the sample under reference may not be considered as an article of plastic." After issue of show cause notice and hearing the respondent, the Assistant Collector passed an order on 29-9-1984 classifying the goods under Item No. 68 of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CET, which, as seen from the Tribunal's Order No. 373-374/86-C dated 30-6-1986 in Appeal Nos. ED(SB)(T) 1318-1179/82 (the parties being Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad and Bakelite Hylam) was not challenged by the manufacturer. In the proceedings before this Tribunal Bakelite Hylam sought to raise a plea that the addition of inert fillers (glass fibre) to duty paid synthetic resin resulting in physical modification of the resin, did not amount to "manufacture" for the purpose of excise duty levy. The Tribunal held that since this ground had not been taken before the lower authorities - it had been given up before the lower appellate authority - Bakelite Hylam could not agitate this ground before the Tribunal. The Tribunal referred t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lying on this judgment Shri Sunder Rajan submitted that the dough moulding compound in the instant case fell under Item No. 15A(1), CET. The Department's contention is that the Collector (Appeals) is wrong in holding that moulding compound manufactured out of duty paid resin would not be liable to duty again under Item No. 15A(1), CET. In support of the stand that duty would be leviable, Shri Sunder Rajan relied on this Tribunal's decision in Collector of Central Excise, Thane v. Indian Dyestuff Industries Ltd., Bombay -1986 (26) E.L.T. 936. Wherein it was held that duty would be leviable on the form in which the goods (formulated dyestuffs in that case) were cleared. 7. Shri B. Shankar, for the respondent, countered the above submiss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the case of Indian Dyestuff Industries Ltd. (supra) Shri Shankar submitted that the issue therein was one of valuation and not manufacture. 11. Shri Shankar referred to the Andhra Pradesh High Court's judgment dated 4-4-1985 in Writ Petition No. 3320 of 1976 filed by the present respondent. Following the Bombay High Court's judgment in Industrial Plastic Corporation Private Ltd. case (supra) and taking note of the Government's Circular Letter F. No. 93/2/82-CX. 3 dated 6-10-1982 to all Collectors of Central Excise, the Court observed :- "It is not necessary to go into the details of the matter in this case inasmuch as the matter is concluded by a judgment of Bombay High Court in Industrial Plastic Corporation Private Ltd. and Others v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nufacturing process here was simple mixing whereas that in the Indian Cable Co. case was complicated. We do not think that this makes for any difference. Whether the mixing process was simple or complicated, the fact remains that resin was mixed with inorganic fillers and cellulosic fibres and the resultant product was no longer known as resin but as "dough moulding compound". The only question to be considered is whether such compound made out of duty-paid resin would attract duty again. This was precisely the question in the Indian Cable Co. case. The Tribunal had observed in that case that in the case of Industrial Plastic Corporation -1983 (12) E.L.T. 425 (supra), before the Bombay High Court, the provision which fell for interpretation....