TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1014X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be given a restrictive meaning and shall include any premises made available to the manufacturer goods falling under sub-heading No. 7308.50. Tribunal in the case of Ranjit Sagar Dam (2006 (1) TMI 356 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI) allowed the benefit of Notification No. 4/97-CE in respect of pre-mix concrete where the pre-mix was manufactured away from the site of Dam and transported to the Dam. The Tribunal allowed the benefit of Notification which provided nil rate of duty to pre-mix concrete manufactured at site. The Revenue filed appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana and the same was dismissed. In the present case also, we find that as there was no place of fabricating the BBSs at site as the bridge is to built on a creek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide order dated 19.9.2003 remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue of classification afresh. The present impugned order is passed in pursuance of the remand order passed by the Tribunal. In the present impugned order, the adjudicating authority held that BBSs are classifiable under Chapter 7308.90 and chargeable to duty @ 15% ad valorem by denying the benefit of Notification No. 61/90-CE dated 20.3.1990 on the ground that the BBS are not fabricated at spot. The relevant portion of the findings of the adjudicating authority is reproduced below:- The noticees have claimed the exemption under notification no.61/90 dated 20.03.90 under which the goods falling under 73.08 fabricated at the site of work for use ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in view of this, the denial of benefit of notification is not sustainable. The appellant also relied upon the decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Chief Engg. Ranjit Sagar Dam reported in 2006 (198) ELT 503 (Tri-LB) whereby in a similar situation, benefit of Notification No. 61/90 was allowed which provided nil rate of duty to pre-mix concrete manufactured at the site of construction of the Dam. The appeal filed by the Revenue against the said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab Hryana reported in 2007 (217) ELT 345 (P H). The contention is that as the BBSs were fabricated at site, therefore, the appellants are entitled for availment of benefit of Notification. 5. The Revenue relied upon findings of the lower au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Notification on the ground that the fabrication work was not done at the spot and the BBSs are fabricated at place nearby the Creek at which the bridge is to be built provided by the State Government. As there was no place at the site and this situation was visualized by Board and the Board issued a Circular dated 18.5.1999 whereby the Board has clarified that the expression site' may not be given a restrictive meaning and shall include any premises made available to the manufacturer goods falling under sub-heading No. 7308.50. 8. Further, we find that Tribunal in the case of Ranjit Sagar Dam (supra) allowed the benefit of Notification No. 4/97-CE in respect of pre-mix concrete where the pre-mix was manufactured away from the site of D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
