Assessee is engaged in the process of cold rolling of hot rolled stainless steel patta\/patti on job-work basis. Purpose of cold rolling is only to reduce the gauge of the SS patta\/patti. The Department had taken the view that this process amounts\u00a0\u00a0 to\u00a0 \u201cmanufacture\u201d as\u00a0 per Section 2(f) of\u00a0 the Central Excise Act, 1944 and that\u00a0 the extended period of limitation was invokable under section 11A of that Act. There was a difference of opinion between the Judicial and Technical Member of the CESTAT. After reference to the Third Member, the entire process was taken\u00a0 note of by the Third Member in detail and he held that the process amounts to \u201cmanufacture\u201d and that theextended period of limitation was validly invoked.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Whether process of cold rolling of hot rolled strips amounts to \u201cmanufacture\u201d and whether the extended period of limitation is invokable?<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Supreme Court affirmed the view of the Third Member which gave elaborate reasons for holding that the process amounts to \u201cmanufacture\u201d. As far as extended period of limitation is concerned, the Court also upheld the view of the Tribunal which had held that several manufacturers which dealt with similar activity\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 to that of Assessee were treating the process as \u201cmanufacture\u201d and that prior judgments of the Tribunal had held that the process amounted to \u201cmanufacture\u201d and hence he could not claim that there wasbonafide <\/em>belief in not levying duty.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n The process of cold rolling of hot rolled strips amounts to \u201cmanufacture\u201d and the extended period of limitation is invokable. (CA No. 5784-5788 of 2007 and 9196- 9202 of 2012 dt. 14-12-2015)<\/p>\n Editorial <\/em><\/strong>: The view of the Tribunal seems to be influenced by the fact that the Tariff and the HSN seem to treat the process as \u201cmanufacture\u201d, though other reasons are also given by the Tribunal. Again, while discussing the question of extended period of limitation, the Tribunal has taken the view that the Tariff having specifically treated the process as manufacture, the assessee could not have entertained bonafide <\/em>belief that the process was not in fact manufacture. The Supreme Court has merely reproduced the judgment of the Tribunal\u00a0 and affirmed\u00a0 it without looking into the question whether the Tariff\u00a0 can control the meaning\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 of the word \u201cmanufacture\u201d in the Act. In Moti Laminates (1995) 3 SCC 23<\/em><\/strong>, the Supreme Court had held that the Tariff entries are irrelevant in deciding whether goods were manufactured or not.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you take care of your immediate surroundings, the universe will take care of itself.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n – Mahatma Gandhi\u00a0<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Central Excise Act, 1944Held<\/h3>\n
\nS. 2(f)(i): Manufacture includes any process- Incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product \u2013 \u201cManufacture\u201d \u2013 Process of cold rolling of hot rolled strips \u2013 Extended period of limitation [Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985,
\nS. 11A]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12975","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gst-law"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-3nh","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12975","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12975"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12975\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12976,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12975\/revisions\/12976"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12975"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12975"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12975"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}