1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPLICATION NO.2 OF 2003 The Commissioner of Central Excise. ...Applicant vs. M/s.National Telecom of India Ltd. ...Respondent. --- Ms.S.V.Bharucha with R.C.Master, for Applicant. Mr.Manoj Sanklecha i/b. Akshar Laws, for Respondent. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 21st October,2008. P.C.:- 1. This application was admitted on 24.9.2005 on the following question of law:- “Whether the assembly of accessories of telephones, EPABAX and key telephone system and Telex machines amounts to manufacturing 2 process as defined under section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act,1944 ?” The learned Counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection that since the dispute in the present case relates to rate of duty the application is not maintainable in this Court. He relied on a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of “Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi-I vs. S.R.Tissues Pvt.Ltd., 2005(186) E.L.T.385(S.C.)” In our opinion, the decision of the Apex Court in the case “S.R.Tissues Pvt.Ltd.” is distinguishable on facts. In that case, the Apex Court has not decided that the dispute relating to manufacture would amount to a dispute relating to rate of duty. Therefore, the decision of the Apex Court in the above case does not dis-entitle the applicant to file the present application before this Court. 2. The question as to whether the process carried on by the assessee amounts to manufacture is a question of law required to be answered by this Court. 3 3. In this view of the matter, the application is allowed. The Tribunal is directed to forward a statement of the case raising the aforesaid question of law for the opinion of this court as expeditiously as possible. Rule is made absolutely accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)