ADDITIONAL SUPDT. ENGINEER Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant filed this appeal against the Order -in -Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the appeal filed by the Revenue was allowed. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the activity undertaken by the appellant such as cutting to size and drilling hole etc. on the duty paid angles and plates amounts to manufacture. Heard both sides. The contention of the appellant is that the appellant is a State Electricity Board which is a State Govt. organization. The appellants were receiving the duty paid angles and channels and they were only cutting to size and drilling holes in the factory and the same were cleared to different sites where they were used in the transmission poles. The appellant relied upon the various decisions of the Tribunal whereby it is held that activity of drilling, cutting and punching of duty paid channels and angles does not amount to manufacture.

(2.) WE have examined the various case law relied upon by both sides. Revenue relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Electrical & Hardware Industries (Supra) where the Hon'ble High Court held that manufacture of cross -arms by cutting, drilling and welding, the MS Angles amounts to manufacture. We find that in the present case, there is no such allegation that the appellants are manufacturing cross -arms, therefore, the ratio of the above decision is not applicable on the facts of the present case. In the case of Richardson & Cruddas (1972) Ltd. (Supra), the Tribunal had held that the process of conversion of iron and steel products into columns, purlins, bracings etc. amounts to manufacture. In the present case, the appellants are not manufacturing any such thing, therefore, the ratio of this decision is also not helpful to the Revenue. The Tribunal in the case of Tansi Engineering Works v. CCE reported in : 1996 (88) ELT 407 held that cutting and punching of holes in angles and channels does not amount to manufacture as no new commodity comes into existence. The Revenue filed appeal and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the appeal reported as, 1999 (107) ELT A185. The Tribunal in another case CCE v. Tamil Nadu State Electricity Board after considering the earlier case law held that process of cutting and drilling holes carried on duty paid angles and channels does not amount to manufacture. In view of the above decisions of the Tribunal which are directly on the issue involved in the present appeal, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.