AAR – Liability to pay excise duty in respect of operations performed on battery cells for their clearance as battery bank

In Re Delta Power Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. (AAR) – In the present case there is no transformation that brings about a fundamental change in the character and use of the goods. The name remains the same (i.e. accumulator, although an assembly of batteries is called a battery bank), the character and usage remain the same (i.e. provide direct current to an appliance though of differing magnitude etc.) Applying the tests specified by the Apex Court, it cannot be said that a new article has emerged having a different name, character or usage. The activities undertaken do not amount to “manufacture”for the purpose of levy of excise duty.  In the circumstances, we are of the view that the activities performed at the Chennai facility of the applicant in respect of imported battery cells as described in para 4 cannot be said to amount to “manufacture”under Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the ruling is given accordingly.

Related posts:

1. Excise Duty notifications to reduce effective rate of excise duty from 10% to 8%
2. Important changes/amendment in respect of Central excise duty
3. Excise duty circular on Irregular availment of Cenvat credit on certain activities not amounting to manufacture
4. If a product is “marketable” and has a shelf value, it is liable to excise duty- SC
5. Seeks to provide exemption from Addl. duty of excise and special addl. excise duty to goods supplied to UN and such international organisations