CARYAIRE EQUIPMENT INDIA PVT. Vs. COMMR. OF CUS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue involved in this appeal, filed by M/s. Caryaire Equipment India Pvt. Ltd., is whether the 'Aluminium Grills' made out of extruded aluminium sections are eligible for the benefit of Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme (DEPB).

(2.) Shri R.K. Goel, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellants manufacture and sale aluminium grills made out from extruded aluminium section; that the processes of manufacture involve cutting of aluminium extruded sections into different required sizes and joining them mechanically with the help of extruded pipe and powder coating the grills in required colour, that they filed Shipping Bill dated 8 -6 -2002 for exporting the impugned grilled claiming DEPB benefits under Item No. 7 of Product Group : Engineering - Product Code : 61 which reads as "Extruded aluminium products including pipe and tubes"; that the Commissioner, under the impugned order, confiscated the impugned grills with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine and imposed penalty on them on the ground of mis -declaration for claiming DEPB benefits holding that the impugned grills were not extruded aluminium product, but fabricated grills. The learned Advocate, further submitted that the fabrication is a process by which the extruded aluminium sections are being converted into extruded aluminium grills; that the process of fabrication cannot take out the grills made out of the extruded aluminium section from the category of extruded aluminium products; that the fabrication is a process and not the category of the product; that Serial No. 7 of Product Code 61 covers all extruded aluminium products irrespective of the process of manufacture; that the word "Product" is defined in Webster's comprehensive Dictionary and "anything produced or obtained as a result of some operation or work"; that accordingly the expression Extruded Aluminium Products" means anything produced or obtained from extruded aluminium. He relied upon the decision in the case of CCE v. Protein Products of India, 1988 (38) E.L.T. 749 (S.C.) wherein it has been held that "the expression 'bone product' therefore merely means anything produced or obtained from bones. Whether such derivation is by a simple physical process or by a chemical reaction would seem to make no difference to the end -product". Reliance has also been placed on the decision in Bharat Rubber Regenerating Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Patna, 1984 (18) E.L.T. 85 (T) wherein it has been held that the expression "Rubber Products" acquires a definite connotation such as when one talks of Milk Products, milk is not included therein but only the products made out of milk. Finally the learned Advocate mentioned that the appellants had not misdeclared the product since the product had been very clearly declared as grills under the expression "Aluminium extruded products", that is only a question of interpretation whether the grills are covered under the said expression; that as such the confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty are unwarranted.

(3.) Countering the arguments, Shri H.C. Verma, learned D.R., sub mitted that as per the Input -Output Norms fixed for getting the benefit of DEPB Scheme, norm has only been fixed for Aluminium Extrusion/ Aluminium Profile as the final products and not for grills, that this goes to show that grills arc not covered by the DEPB Scheme, that admittedly grills had been fabricated and not extruded and as such are not covered by Product 61, serial No. 7 of the DEPB Scheme.