AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Though in these appeals, various issues are raised, we feel that the only issue which needs consideration relates to cutting of the conveyor belting into required sizes and the issue is as to whether it involves manufacture or not. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ''CESTAT'') in its impugned order [2006 (193) E.L.T. 100 (Tribunal)] has dealt with this issue in the following manner :-
"Another point raised in the Revenue''s appeal is that the appellant buys the conveyor belting in endless length and cuts them to required size and that involves manufacture. This contention of the Revenue is not correct. The conveyor belting is the material used in the construction of conveyors. Like fabrics and other materials, belting comes in endless length and the activity cutting, etc., carried out by the appellant cannot be considered as amounting to manufacture. So, no duty is attracted."
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the aforesaid decision of the CESTAT does not call for any interference. Mere cutting of the lengthy conveyor belt into smaller sizes would not amount to manufacture, ipso facto, unless it is shown that as a result of the said cutting, it was transferred into a new product which was a marketable product. Revenue has failed to bring out these aspects. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in ''Servo-Med Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai'' [2015 (319) E.L.T. 578 (S.C.)].
The appeals are, accordingly, dismissed.