TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (7) TMI 368
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....les into powder in its factory, or at the premises of so called job workers who were actually dummies of the applicant and cleared it without payment of duty during the period from 1-4-1994 to 3-2-1997. The notice issued was dated 23-6-1997. The representative of the applicant does not dispute the application of Note 6(b) of Chapter 39 of the tariff that conversion of LDPE into powder amounts to manufacture. He contends however, that pulverisation of the granules which were undertaken by the Job workers was necessary because of labour problems in the applicant's factory and that the job workers were independent, duty payable was by them, and not the applicant. It is not denied that the machines for pulverisation were provided to the job wor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....licant's letter dated 1-4-1993 seeking permission for sending the plastic to job workers for pulverisation would result in the department gathering the impression that it did not itself carry out such pulverisation. There is no evidence to show that the process of manufacture of the powder in the applicant's factory was communicated to the department. He contends that Section 11AC would apply for the period after 20th September, 1996. 5. It is difficult at this stage to conclude that the applicant had informed the department of the fact that it undertook the powderisation of plastics. Documents in the applicant's letterhead containing details of manufacturing process in which the emergence of the powder is mentioned and the flow chart....