AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (6) TMI 348
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the Appellant. None, for the Respondent. [Order per : V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)]. - In these four appeals preferred by the Revenue, the issue involved is whether the various products manufactured by M/s. S.A.E. (India) Ltd. are excisable under the provisions of Central Excise Act. When the matters were called, no one was present on behalf of the respondents inspite of notice. As th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing of steel beams/joints do not result in emergence of any new products and, therefore, the process carried out by the respondents does not amount to manufacture. Ld. DR mentioned that the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court recently in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur v. Man Structurals Ltd., [2001 (130) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.) = 2001 (44) RLT 113 (S.C.)] has remanded the matter to the Ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... undertaken by the assessees and also whether these are marketable. The Supreme Court has also referred to its earlier two decisions in the case of Moti Laminates Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Ahmedabad [1995 (76) E.L.T. 241 (S.C.)] and Union of India & Anr. v. The Delhi Cloth and General Mills Company Ltd. Anr. etc. [1997 (91) E.L.T. 23 (S.C.) = 1997 (19) RLT 475 (S.C.)]. We observe t....