2016 (11) TMI 781

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Punjab and Haryana High Court set aside the order of this Tribunal and remanded the matter back to this Tribunal to decide the issue on merits vide order dated 10.8.2006 in Central Excise Appeal No.83 of 2006. Hence this appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are the appellant has received an order from the Rail Coach Factory for supply of carline and body side pillar and got the same manufactured out of the raw-material namely Blank supplied by the Rail Coach Factory. The work was got done by appellant on job work basis. By doing the activity of Punching, Notching, Bending in case of carline as well as edge bending in case of Body Side Pillars, the claim of the appellant is that the same does not amount of manufacture as no new product....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner (Appeals) has examined the issue in detail and the activity undertaken by the appellant duly covered Chapter note 6 of Section XVII of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. He further submits that the appellant has failed to disclose their activity, therefore, the extended period has rightly been invoked. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. The activity undertaken by the appellant is not disputed. We have also perused the Chapter note 6 of Section XVII of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 which is reproduced as under:- "6. In respect of goods covered by this Section conversion of an article which is incomplete or unfinished but having the essential character of the complete or finished article (including b....