TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (11) TMI 143
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submitted that the Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of epoxy coated steel bars/rebars supplied by different parties which are classifiable under sub-heading 7215.90 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act; that the Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned Order has held that the process of epoxy coating is more or less similar to the process of galvanization which does not amount to manufacture. The learned D.R., further, submitted that the process of epoxy coating is very much elaborate, precise and ultra modern; that epoxy powder is applied by electrostatic spray on the hot steel bar at preset temperature level at 232°C; that the bar is machine blasted, using steel shot and grits as abrasives, prior to heating on an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld that process of application of Phenol formaldehyde resin on plywood and pressing it with hand roller at 100°C amounts to manufacture resulting in a new weather proof product; that the Supreme Court has affirmed the decision as reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. A40. Reliance has also been placed on the following decisions : - (i) CCE, Bombay v. S.D. Fine Chemicals, 1995 (77) E.L.T. 49 (S.C.) (ii) Brakes India Ltd. v. Superintendent of Central Excise, 1998 (101) E.L.T. 241 (S.C.) (iii) Union of India v. J.G. Glass, 1998 (97) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.) (iv) CCE v. D.K. Electricals Industries, 1994 (74) E.L.T. 272 (T) 2.3 The learned D.R. also mentioned that the impugned products are prepared f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the year 2002, Note 4 has been inserted in Chapter 73 of the Central Excise Tariff wherein the process of galvanization has been claimed to be the process of manufacture. The learned Counsel, further, submitted that the bars have identical chemical composition and physical properties; that as rebars remain rebars even after weather proof anti-corrosion-epoxy coating treatment, there is no manufacture of a new commodity; that the issue has been examined by the Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. v. State of Kerala, 1989 (42) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.) wherein it has been observed by the Supreme Court that "The purpose of galvanizing a pipe is merely to make it weather-proof. It remains a steel tube. By being put through the proce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; 526/22/2000, dated 19-4-2000 (ii) 19/19/1994, dated 9-2-1994. 3.3 In reply the learned D.R. mentioned that process of epoxy coating is different from galvanization as epoxy coated bars are prepared for distinct, separate and different use. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The Central Excise duty is leviable on the activity of manufacture. The Supreme Court has held in the case of Union of India v. Delhi Cloth & General Mills, 1977 (1) E.L.T. (J 199) that manufacture implies a change, but every change is not manufacture. "But something more is necessary and there must be transformation; a new and different article must emerge having a distinctive name, character or use." The Supreme Court ....