PERFECT STRIPS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE four appeals are filed by the appellants agitating against confirmation or various demands of duty. Duty amounting to Rs. 37,59,775.00 has been confirmed on the ground that there was discrepancy in cold rolled strips cleared on payment of duty and that recorded in the diary. Duty amounting to Rs. 9,07,081.00 has been demanded on the amount shown in the diary even though it was contested that all these amounts were received by cheque and duly recorded in the book of accounts. Further, an amount of Rs. 6,31,742.00 has been demanded on the ground that duty was chargeable on the outstanding balance of Rs. 45,68,791.00/ - assuming that the amount shown as outstanding pertains to sales made without payment of duty in the past.

(2.) ARGUING the case for the appellants, Shri R. Swaminathan, the ld. Consultant submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE, Chandigarh v. Steel Strips Ltd. reported in 1995 (77) E.L.T. 248 ruled that cold rolled steel strips produced out of duty paid hot rolled steel strips do not undergo a process of manufacture and hence not again liable to duty. He submits that this decision of the Apex Court was on the old Tariff. He submits that this Tribunal in the case of Steel Strips Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 2001 (42) RLT 35 held that cold rolling of duty paid hot rolled strip does not mount to manufacture, and therefore, though that decision of the Apex Court was under the old Tariff, for the purpose of new Tariff also, it cannot be held as a process of manufacture under CETA, 1985.

(3.) THE ld. Consultant, therefore, prays that in view of the above decisions, the appeals may be allowed.