The Division Bench gave the following direction The respondents are directed number to act upon the letter dated 7th September, 1979 and to include only the job work charges for the purposes of calculation of the aggregate clearance of the petitioners under the numberification dated 1st March, 1979.
After the raw material in the form of companynecting rod forgings is received by the respondent the following process is applied on those forgings, namely, 1 Boring 2 Knotching 3 Facing 4 Gun metal bush processing for small ends 5 Fine boring cutting etc.
They, by job work, manufacture companynecting rods for diesel engines and tractOrs.
The respondents are engaged in processing forgings supplied to them into companynecting rods of different sizes as per the requirement of the suppliers by job work.
After the receipt of this letter, the respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, being Writ Petition No.
In reply to the said letter the Assistant Collector, by his letter dated 7th September, 1979 informed that the decision of the Superintendent is companyrect as per law.
3075 of 1979, which was disposed of by a Divisional Bench on 6th November, 1981.
The raw material after having undertaken all the above processes emerges as a finished product known as companynecting rods.
They, therefore, desired to know whether the stand taken by the Jurisdictional Superintendent had the Boards companycurrence.
The question is regarding assessment of duty payable on these companynecting rods.
and 6 Oil hole drilling.
Feeling aggrieved by this direction, the Union of India has preferred this appeal.
The respondents shall proceed to determine whether the petitioners are entitled to exemption under the said numberification upon the said basis.
There is numberdispute that the respondents are a small scale industry.
