TMI Blog2000 (6) TMI 285X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iltering out undesirable sergeants bites (sic) in the power supply. For these purposes battery is not required. However, a UPS, appropriately so called, also steps into the picture when the supply from the main power supply is interrupted and thus continuous i.e., uninterrupted power supply so that the goods, material or any information under process is not lost as a result of the disruption in power supply. 3. The appellant in some cases supplied the UPS equipped with the battery, which provides power by itself in the event of breakdown and in some other cases supplied UPS without the battery. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether, in those cases where the battery was supplied, the cost of that battery should form part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess continuous, cleaning and filtering the power supply, the battery was an essential pre-requisite for an UPS to provide uninterrupted power supply. In such cases it was the source of the power. The persons who purchased the UPS with the battery but did so because they wanted to use the system to ensure uninterrupted power supply (in case when the main power failed). Therefore, for such UPS the battery was an integral and essential part of the UPS as had been held in Kerala State Electronics Development Corporation Ltd. v. CCE. It therefore, set aside the view of the Collector (Appeals) and accepted the view of the Assistant Collector that the cost of the battery has to be included. 6. The contention of the advocate for the appellant is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y during a break in the main power supply whereas the latter does this appear to us to be correct. If that is the case the appellant was in fact supplying two types of goods. The static converter, which was supplied did not have and was not required to have a battery, as an essential part. The units which were supplied with the battery therefore being something other than the static converter i.e., a UPS. It cannot be anybody's case that UPS which has as one of its functions supply of power when the main power supply breaks down, with the object of ensuring that the materials in process are not lost due to the loss of power, does require such an alternative source of power which in this case is a battery. In that situation we see no reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctioning of the UPS cannot itself justify its inclusion. He says that in decision CCE v. Kishor Pumps Pvt. Ltd. the Tribunal took the view that an electric motor cannot be regarded as an integral part of the pumps although it is essential for the pump to function. The Tribunal noted that a power driven pump is complete itself as an excisable goods and is a marketable commodity without an electric motor and therefore electric motor is not an essential for marketing of the pump. The fact that motor is an essential for the functioning of the pump does not make it an integral part. This position may come to the appellant's aid in the case of static converter which is purchased only for its function of filtering and purifying the current and pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
