COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. TUDOR (I) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned D.R. None appeared for the respondents. We have taken on record the written submissions filed by the respondents. The lower appellate authority has held repair/remaking of rejected batteries to be covered under Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, holding that the same does not amount to manufacture.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that the appellants are manufacturing Electric Accumulator (Automobile Batteries) falling under Heading No. 85.07 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act and are availing of modvat/cenvat facility. They are bringing defective Automobile Batteries into the factory during the guarantee/warranty period under Rule 173H for remaking. The batteries are cut open and the same are sent for separation of lead and plastic box. The reprocessing of defective/damaged batteries involves the process of re -melting of the cut -open plastic box and refining the lead. The same refined lead is used in a continuous process of manufacturing of new batteries with distinct new serial number.

(3.) PROVISION of Rule 173H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 are as follows : Retention in, or bringing into, a factory or warehouse, of duty paid goods. - (1) Excepts as hereinafter provided, no excisable goods or parts thereof on which duty has been paid shall be brought into, or retained in, a factory or a warehouse.