Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise vs ) J.M.T. Granites & Exports on 3 August, 2010
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal Nos.E/618/04, E/619/04 & E/620/04
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.48, 49 & 50/2004 (M-III) all dated 16.3.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai]
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms.JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice-President
Honble Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, Technical Member
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? :
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? :
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of
the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities? :
Commissioner of Central Excise,
Chennai
Appellant/s
Versus
1) J.M.T. Granites & Exports
2) Vijeta Fabrics Pvt. Ltd.
3) M.B.Granites (P) Ltd.
Respondent/s
Appearance :
Shri A.B.Niranjan Babu, SDR Ms.Radhika Chandrasekar, Advocate For the Appellant/s For the Respondent/s CORAM:
Honble Ms.Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member Date of hearing : 3.8.2010 Date of decision : 3.8.2010 Final Order No.____________ Per Jyoti Balasundaram The issue for determination in these three appeals as to whether cutting of granite blocks into slabs amounts to manufacture attracting levy of excise duty.
2. We have heard both sides. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the apex courts decision in Aman Marble Industries Vs CCE [2003 (157) ELT 393 (SC)] to hold that process carried out by the assessees of cutting marble blocks into slabs does not amount to manufacture. On the other hand, ld. SDR relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner Vs Pratap Singh [2003 (153) ELT 711] against which the assessees S.L.P. was dismissed by the apex court and reported in 2003 (156) ELT A382 (SC). Ld. counsel for the assessees draws our attention to the judgment of the Honble Rajasthan High Court in Anmol Granites Vs UOI [2006 (199) ELT 769 (Raj.)] holding that cutting and polishing of granites into slabs and tiles does not amount to manufacture. The High Court has considered the effect of the dismissal of SLP in the Pratap Singh case cited supra and held that dismissal of SLP cannot have overriding effect over the ratio laid down by the apex court in Aman Marbles case.
3. Following the ratio of Aman Marble Industries decision supra, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeals.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(Dr.CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY) (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM)
TECHNICAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT
gs
1
2