D.K.JAIN, ASOK KUMAR GANGULY
Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-II – Appellant
Versus
M/s Osnar Chemical Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
D.K. Jain, J.:
1. This batch of appeals by the revenue, under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short “the Act”) arises out of final orders dated 23rd December, 2008 in Appeal No. E/379/2007; 25th September, 2008 in Appeal Nos. Excise/522 & 523/2007 and 28th October, 2009 in Appeal No. E/225/2009 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench, Bangalore (for short “the Tribunal”). By the impugned orders in cross-appeals by the revenue and the assessee, the Tribunal has held that the mechanical mixing of polymer with heated bitumen does not amount to manufacture of a new commercially identifiable product and therefore, is not exigible to Excise duty under the Act.
2. Since these three appeals involve a common question of law, these are being disposed of by this common judgment. However, in order to appreciate the controversy, the facts emerging from C.A. Nos. 4055-4056 of 2009, which was treated as the lead case, are being adverted to.
The respondent in this appeal (for short “the assessee”) is engaged in the supply of Polymer Modified Bitumen (for short “PMB”). We may note that in one of the appeals (C.A. No.5633/2009),
Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. Vs. Commnr. Of Central Excise, Mumbai, 2010 (260) E.L.T. 338 (SC)
Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. Ducksole (I) Ltd. & Ors., (2005) 10 SCC 462
Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III Vs. Uni Products India Ltd. & Ors, (2009) 9 SCC 295
Commissioner of Central Excise, Gujarat Vs. Pan Pipes Resplendents Limited, (2006) 1 SCC 777
Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi-I Vs. S.R. Tissues Pvt. Ltd., 2005 (186) E.L.T. 385 (SC)
Shyam Oil Cake Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur, 2004 (174) E.L.T. 145 (SC)
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-II Vs. Tarpaulin International, 2010 (256) E.L.T. 481 (SC)
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd, 2006 8 SCC 314
Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur, (2005) 2 SCC 662
Metlex (I) (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi; (2005) 1 SCC 271
Hindustan Poles Corpn. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta, (2006) 4 SCC 85
HPL Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh, (2006) 5 SCC 208
Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs Vs. Tikatar Industries, 2006 (202) E.L.T. 215 (S.C.)
Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai Vs. Tikitar Industries, 2010 (253) E.L.T. 513 (S.C.)
Collector of Central Excise, Vadodara Vs. Tikitar Industries, 2000 (118) E.L.T. 468 (Tri.)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.