ORDER
Shri G.A. Brahma Deva, Member
1. This appeal arises out of and is directed against the impugned order dt.30.11.89 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore.
2. Arguing for the assessee Shri.Sampath, Learned Advocate, submitted that the following points are to be considered in this appeal. Whether the activity undertaken by the party amounts to manufacture, whether the assessee can be considered as a manufacturer since he is only a job worker, and further whether the item is capable of being marketed at the time of completion of the product by the assessee. He submitted that M/s.ITI supplied parts of material like resistors for manufacture of goods on job work. The appellants have manufactured printed cord assembly and same were despatched to M/s.ITI Shri.Sampath submitted that apart from various pleas the party has specifically taken a plea that the items as such are neither marketable nor being capable of marketed. Inspite of the specific plea the adjudicating authority has not given any specific finding with reference to this aspect.
3. In this connection Shri.Thomas drew our attention to the finding portion given by the Collector:
“The plea of marketability raised by the defence is also of no avail since the goods in question are tailor made manufactured and supplied by M/s.Keonics to M/s.ITI as per their specification.”
4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that Commissioner has not given a specific finding with reference to the plea of marketability. In view of this position we are remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue of marketability afresh in accordance with law on providign an opportunity to the party. The party must make use of this opportunity and is at liberty to claim all the connected issues during the re-adjudication proceedings. Thus this appeal is allowed by way of remand.
(Pronounced and dictated in the Open Court)