SIDHARTHA TUBES LIMITED Vs. COLLECTOR OC CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order under appeal was passed by the Customs, Excise and gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal.

(2.) The appellants manufacture mild steel pipes and tubes. About 30% of the production is cleared at that stage and the product is then known as black pipe. The balance production is taken to a separate shed in the appellants factory premises and galvanised. The dispute is in relation to the galvanised black pipe. According to the appellants, what they clear is black pipe, the process of galvanisation is not a process of manufacture and no addition can be made to the assessable value of the black pipe on account of the galvanisation that subsequently occurred. The Tribunal rejected the contention. It said that the appellants themselves had, in their classification list, declared M. S. black pipes and galvanised pipes as their products. In such a situation, the mere fact that galvanisation was done subsequent to paying duty on the M. S. black pipes could not, by itself, be a ground for not including the cost of galvanisation in the assessable value of the black pipes subjected to the process of galvanisation. While that process did not amount to manufacture, it added to the intrinsic value of the product to make up the full commercial value which was realised by the appellants by charging a higher price for such pipes covering the cost of galvanisation.

(3.) We are in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal. The mere fact that the process of galvanisation is carried on in another shed can make no difference. When the assessable value is to be calculated of the galvanised black pipe made by the appellants, the element of the cost of galvanisation must form a part thereof.