Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
M/S. Bpl Display Devices Ltd. vs C.C.E., Meerut. on 10 May, 2001
ORDER
S.S. Kang
1. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of colour picture tubes. The factory of appellants was visited by Preventive officers on 11.02.99 and it was found that defective colour picture tubes, received by the appellants, had undergone complete manufacturing activity. The colour tubes, received by the appellants were popped apart and out this salvaged colour picture tubes, only some parts were recovered. The appellants, with these recovered parts and (sic) manufactured picture tubes. Therefore, the duty was demanded on the picture tubes received for repair and cleared thereafter.
2. Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellants, submits that the picture tubes, received in the factory and Rule 173 H provides that a manufacturer may bring into factory excisable goods which need reconditioning or repair. He submits that this re-making or re-conditioning will not amount to manufacture if the goods are subsequently cleared after rectification of entity in the same form in which they were brought to the factory. For this, he relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shree Ram Refrigeration Industries vs C.C.E. reported in 1986 (26) E.L.T. 353. He submits that the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Meerut vs Samtel Color Ltd. reported in 2000 (41) RLT 333, in a similar situation , held that the activity undertaken by the manufacturer does not amount to manufacture, but it is repair. He, therefore, prays that the appeal be allowed.
3. Heard ld. D.R. and perused the records.
4. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture colour picture tubes and after removing the defects, (sic) the picture tubes were cleared to their customers. In a similar situation in the case of another T.V. manufacturer i.e. M/s. Samtel Color Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal held that the activity undertaken by the manufacturer does not amount to manufacture. The ratio of the above decision of the Tribunal is fully application in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Hence, the im-pugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. (Dictated in Court).