TMI Blog2001 (9) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hiring the labour services of noticee No. 2 viz. M/s. Bhag Singh Bansal Sons; that the work started in January, 1988 and completed in June, 1988. It was stated that the raw material used for the fabrication of steel structures like columns, beams, purlins, bracings, etc. for erection of shed were purchased from the market; that the electricity for the fabrication was used from the power connection of Rolling Mill Unit; that the total cost of steel structure and part thereof amounted to Rs. 5,07,201.90 which included labour charges of Rs. 49,132.67. It is observed that the steel structures are classifiable under Chapter Heading 7308.90 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and attract duty at the rate of 15% ad valorem during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h, JDR for the respondents. We have considered the submissions made before us by both the sides. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CCE, Jaipur v. Mann Structurals Ltd. - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 401 (S.C.), have observed that the tariff item 73.08 of the Central Excise Tariff covers structures and parts of structures as therein stated. It is further observed in the judgment that the Tribunal failed to appreciate that there is a tariff entry which makes structurals exigible to excise duty and that they are also exigible, provided that they are new identifiable goods that are the result of manufacture or process and they are marketable. Accordingly, the Hon'ble Apex Court remanded the matters to the Tribunal for re-consideration and to determine whet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time barred. It is submitted that during the relevant time notwithstanding specific entry for the steel structures under Heading 73.08, in a number of decisions/judgments, it was held that the goods like sheds and structural materials are not subject to duty. One such case law relied upon is the decision of the Tribunal in the Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh [1999 (107) E.L.T. 337 (T) = 1999 (31) RLT 5 (CEGAT)]. In this decision it is observed that in all such matters the manufacture of goods does not take place even when some of the items are specified under Central Excise Tariff Heading 73.08. The reliance is also placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Thungabhadra Steel Products Ltd. v. Union of India - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
