Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. - (1.) This is an appeal under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinaftr called 'the Act'). The appeal is directed against the Order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter called 'the CEGAT').
(2.) The respondent herein filed a classification list on 16th March, 1982 seeking approval of sawn timber and dried timber as non-excisable. The submission of the respondent was that timber logs were only sawn into sizes and these did not tantamount to any manufacture. However, the Assistant Collector, Madras, held that the conversion of timber logs into sawn timber satisfied the conditions of manufacture insofar as the conversion of timber logs into sawn-timber involves transformation whereby a new and different article with the distinct name, character or use emerges which is different from timber logs. It was held accordingly that excise duty @ 8% ad valorem under Tariff Item 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff was leviable.
(3.) The respondent filed an appeal before the Collector of Appeals who concurred with the Assistant Collector upholding the duty. Aggrieved thereby the respondent filed an appeal before the CEGAT. The Tribunal in the judgment under appeal, relied on its decision in the case of Sanghvi Enterprises, Jammu, Tawi v. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh, (1984) 16 ELT 317 and the Karnataka High Court in the case of Moideen Kunhi v. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore, (1986) 23 ELT 293 and came to the conclusion that no new product emerges by sawing of timber into several sizes. In the premises the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the respondent. Hence, this appeal.;