2019 (5) TMI 1168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... respondent has also filed the cross objection. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent was engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods namely, "Galvanized Corrugated Sheets", falling under Chapter Sub- Heading No. 72104100 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the disputed period, the respondent was engaged in the activities of cutting and corrugation of GP Coils/Sheets received from various parties. The department had held that mere cutting of Coil/GP Coil into sheets does not amount to manufacture and accordingly, no duty was payable by the respondent on such activities. However, with regard to corrugation of sheets, it was held that such activity undertaken by the respondent amounts to manufacture, as a new enti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....defraud the Government Revenue. Thus, it is contended by Revenue that the proviso to Section 11A of the Act has been rightly invoked in the show cause notice, seeking for recovery of the duty amount within the limitation period of 5 years. 4. We have heard Shri Bidhan Chandra, Learned AR for the Revenue-appellant and Shri M.H. Patil, Learned Advocate for the respondent and perused the records including the written note of submissions filed by both sides. 5. We find that the Learned Adjudicating Authority at paragraph 21 in the impugned order has recorded the detailed findings with regard to non-invocation of the extended period of limitation. In this context, he has specifically referred to the knowledge of the department with regard ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the issue, as to whether, the activity of corrugation amounts to manufacture or not was highly contentious and there were divergent views by different judicial forums and finally the issue gets settled by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, in the case of Hansa Metallics Ltd. Vs. Union of India, 2001 (133) ELT 543 (P&H), holding that process of corrugation of plain metallic sheets and galvanized sheets undertaken by the petitioner amounts to manufacture, as a new commercial product having different identity and use come into existence. Even after pronouncement of the said judgment by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Vardhman Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh, 2008 (224) ELT 342 ....