1995 (5) TMI 178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tificial plastic materials falling under the erstwhile tariff items 19 (iii) and 22(3) of 1st Schedule to the then Central Excise Tariff. 2. The impregnated, coated or laminated fabrics based on cotton fabrics or man-made fabrics (popularly known as Leather Cloth) are further subjected to the process of design printing wherever required. The initial duty liability under Tariff Items 19(iii) and 22(3) has been discharged and the dispute is as regards dutiability on process of printing done on such Leather Cloth. The Assistant Collector as well as Collector (Appeals) treated the process of printing as a process incidental or ancillary to the process of manufacture product, and held that the impregnated/processed cloth if cleared after....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....goods. Therefore, no further duty can be levied on these goods because of the printing or embossing. They have, further, contended that since the goods as PVC Leather Cloth are already marketed as such, the other processes cannot be regarded as ancillary or incidental to the completion of the manufacture of the product PVC Leather Cloth. Yet another plea of the appellants is that as the PVC Leather Cloth has already discharged duty liability under Item 19 (iii) or 22 (3), it cannot again be subjected to duty under the same item. 3. Shri Mohan Lal, ld. J.D.R. contended that the process of printing and embossing on the PVC Leather Cloth would clearly be in the nature of the process incidental or ancillary to the completion of the manu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cable to T.I. 19 iii and 22(3) CET. Another argument is that since plain PVC leather cloth has fully discharged the duty liability under item 19 (iii) and 22(3), it cannot again be subjected to duty under the same tariff item for the process of printing. Examining these contentions, it is seen that the definition of manufacture under Sec. 2(f) of Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (as it stood at the relevant time) is an inclusive definition which says, "manufacture includes any process incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product" and goes on to list certain specific processes which will amount to manufacture in respect of certain items in the tariff. The appellants, while heavily relying upon the sub-clauses (v) and (....