COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. TECHNOWELD INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A common question arises in all these matters. All these appeals are thus being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) In all these appeals, the respondents purchased duty-paid wire rods and drew the wire into a thinner gauge. The question is whether by drawing wire into a thinner gauge, manufacture has taken place. The question is whether the wire of the thinner gauge is excisable to duty.

(3.) This question came to be considered by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. In the case of Vishvaman Industries V/s. CCE by an order dated 2-11-2000, it was held that the process of drawing wire from wire rods did not amount to manufacture. The Tribunal based its decision on an earlier decision of the Tribunal in the case of Jyoti Engg. Corpn. V/s. CCE. In Jyoti case the tariff entry concerned was 26-AA(i-a) which included bars, rods, coils, wires etc. The Tribunal has held that the raw material was a wire rod and the final product was also a wire. It has held that no new product has come into existence and that there was no manufacture. Civil appeals filed against both the aforementioned decisions were dismissed.