1998 (7) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , for the Respondent. [Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. - The appellants during the period 1981 to 1983 fabricated, assembled, erected and installed in their own factory three overhead cranes and two Cooling Plants. Show cause notice was issued to them alleging that they had evaded duty leviable on such goods captively consumed. Additional Collector in the impugned order held that coolin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... In support of his argument, he relied upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Braithwaite & Company Ltd. v. C.C.E., Calcutta-II, reported in 1987 (29) E.L.T. 251. Shri Saran appearing for the Revenue supports the impugned order. 3.  We have carefully considered the pleas made before us and have seen the cited judgment. 4. The cited judgment deals with the inclusion of erectio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g. Pvt. Ltd., reported in 1996 (86) E.L.T. 498 which brings out the situation is reproduced below :- "It is correct that cranes falling under Heading 84.26 were specifically brought under the purview of the definition of machinery under Rule 57Q with effect from 16-3-1995. But it would not correct to say that its admissibility prior to this date did not exist. If such cranes performed functions n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to be used in the production or processing of the final products. The situation would be different if such cranes were to be used outside the manufacturing area, say for moving of fully finished goods from the bonded store rooms to the loading platform. Therefore, in each case the location as well as the utilisation of each machinery has to be examined to determine its admissibility under the impu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re excludible, the quantum of duty confirmed will have to be reassessed by excluding from calculation certain charges incurred towards erection and commissioning. For this limited purpose alone, upholding the logic of the order, the proceedings are remitted to the jurisdictional Assistant Collector who shall redetermine the duty leviable, if necessary, after hearing the assessees and issue a speak .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X