TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1279
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this case is Rs. 8,57,549/-. 3. We find that in terms of National Litigation Policy, this appeal is required to be dismissed on this count alone. However, we have also taken up the issue on merits. 4. We find that issue involved in this case is as to whether activity undertaken by the appellant amounts to manufacture or not. In case it amounts to manufacture, the appellant would be required to pay Excise Duty of Rs.8,57,549/- as confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority. 5. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has gone into the details of the process involved in the work being undertaken by the appellant which is enumerated as under:- 2. The appellant purchased duty paid TISCON TMT Bars in coil form from M/s Tata Steel Ltd., Jamshedpur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....us shapes depending on the design and shape of the load bearing member, eg. Circular, polygonal, rectangular, square, U-stirrups or a crosstie. The ends of the stirrups are ideally locked together in the shape of a hook for better unitization of the main reinforcement bars with the concrete structure. 7. I find that the undisputed manufacturing process has been mentioned in Para-2 supra. I also find that Ld. Adjudicator relied upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ujagar Prints vs UOI - 1988 (38) ELT 535 (SC), according to which the activity or process in order to amount manufacture must bring a new, commercial and Identifiable goods have different name character and use, of the product. It was held that the activity o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ific use in the project as the pipeline has to pass through various jurisdictions and after adoption the pipes continue to be pipes for the purposes of carrying water and as per the definition of pipes under the Central Excise Tarff. Therefore, a mere change of physical shape and size for the purpose and need of specific configurations of the main pipeline would not meet the requirements of manufacture under the central excise law. Even in the case of True Forge Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2003 (159) ELT 1175 (T), Hon'ble Tribunal, based on various decisions of Apex Court, held that no manufacture takes place when pipes are converted into fittings viz. Elbows, T-Pipes, Reducers etc. In the case of CCE vs Tarpaulin International reported in 20....