Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1997 (4) TMI 453

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... whether processing operations engaged in by the Appellants on the raw materials issued to them would come within the definition of manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 3. Appellants are manufacturers of steel structurals like transmission towers and parts thereof. They also undertake job work for customers like the APSEB, BHEL ECIL Ltd. The structurals are also galvanized when specifically ordered by the customers. 4. By a Show Cause Notice dated 5-11-1986 Appellants were asked to show cause as to why duty should not be demanded from them for the manufacture of steel structurals falling under T.I. 68 and for removing by them during the years 1985-86 and 1986-87 without payment of duty leviable thereon. 5 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntenna were completed with raw materials supplied by ECIL. The work involved was also cutting, drilling and fabrication of M.S. angles, rods and plates according to the drawing provided by ECIL. They contended that the Antennae fabricated by them were exempted from Central Excise in terms of Notification No. 74/85, dated 17-3-1985 as amended. 5. During the adjudication proceedings Appellants made submission on the same lines. 6. The Collector in the impugned order observed that from the diagram supplied by the ECIL for fabrication of Antenna, it could be seen that the process involved like welding and bending of the materials were undertaken in order to bring a curved shape which is intended for use as the surface of the reflector. From .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... explanation as to how the pillars and angles fabricated by them retained their original identity, the appellants contention that no fresh goods have emerged on account of the fabrication process was not accepted. 7. The Appellants submission before us were on the following lines : (a) The Collector s finding that the Tribunal decision in Aruna Industries (supra) was distinguishable was not correct. In the case of Aruna Industries also the various inputs such as plates, channels and angles were used in the processing of cutting, drilling rebating etc. to make structural shapes like trusses, beams, girders etc. Assembled structural shapes were used for the construction of buildings. The Tribunal had held that the process involved w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates