BRAKES INDIA LIMITED Vs. SUPDT OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. The short question is whether brake lining blanks purchased by the appellant when put to the process of drilling, trimming and chamfering can be said to amount to manufacturing within the meaning of Section 2 (f) of the central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The High court has examined this question in considerable detail and has then observed in paragraph 15 as under:

(2.) The learned Single Judge from whose judgment the division bench was considering the appeal had pointed out that brake lining blanks could not be used by owners of motor vehicles without holes and trimming andchamfering. The learned Single Judge also pointed out that it was only after this process which the blank brake linings underwent that they could be used by automobile manufacturers in the manufacture of their vehicles. We are of the opinion that both the learned Single Judge as well as the division bench applied the correct test and we see no reason to interfere therewith. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.