1999 (9) TMI 198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case in brief are that the respondents herein imported or procured tow and cut it into flocks. The Department alleged that duty was required to be paid on flocks removed for captive consumption during the period 7-6-1990 to 15-3-1995. The ld. Collector after considering the submissions of the respondents herein dropped the proceedings. 4. Shri R.S. Sangia, ld. DR appearing for the Revenue submits that the ld. Commissioner did not take into consideration the respondent's plea that for the period 20-5-1994 to 15-3-1995 they had already paid duty amounting to Rs. 6,73,345/- under protest and that therefore, in the SCN this much duty should not have been demanded; that the ld. Collector should have either held that the duty paid for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ase was fully covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Fine Marble reported in 1985 (22) E.L.T. 128 (Tribunal) in-as-much in that case the Tribunal had held that cutting of flocks into slabs does not amount to manufacture. He submits that as against this w.e.f. 1-3-1986 the entry in the tariff was amended to read as marble in flocks-in-slabs. He submits that with this amendment in the tariff the process of conversion of marble-in-blocks or in slabs is treated as manufacture. He submits that this amendment clearly shows that the decision relied upon by the assessee is on the old tariff. This decision of this Tribunal was no longer a good law insofar as distinct and different entries in the new tariff are concerned. Ld. DR s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... acquired a new name. But, since in this case, the tariff entry recognised the single description man-made fibre with no further sub-division based on length of the fibre and even without distinct enumeration of the various forms of fibre by cutting long fibre into short fibres, the respondent did not bring into existence any new product so as to attract any levy under the same tariff entry. Even by cutting, the respondents obtained man-made fibre. Such cutting therefore, involved no manufacture and hence duty liability can be imposed upon them." Ld. Counsel submitted that in view of this decision of the Apex Court cutting of tow into flocks did not amount to manufacture and hence no duty was liable to be paid. 8. On the question....