9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (6) TMI 788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. - This Revenue appeal arises from OIA No. 16/92(G)(CE) dated 29-8-1992 by which the ld. Commissioner has held the following items to be not excisable as assessees are only carrying out the fabrication work in their workshop :- 1 M.S. Stay sets. 2. L.T. Three phase cross ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finding a place in tariff entry. 3. Ld. Counsel raised a preliminary objection stating that authorisation issued by the Commissioner to file the appeal is not proper and legal. He has himself given the authorisation to the Asstt. Commissioner to file the appeal which is not in terms of law. He contends further that Commissioner (Appeals) has given a clear cut finding that items are not marke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h have clearly held to be not goods as it is not sold in the market. 5. On a careful consideration of the submissions, and on perusal of the Apex Court's judgment, we notice that Apex Court had taken large batch of appeals which dealt with not only the aspect of structurals but also on various other items and a direction was given to the Tribunal to re-examine the issue of marketability in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t also on other aspects of items which was considered as not goods on the premise that they are not marketable. Now that the Apex Court has given the direction that marketability is the test and also that there has to be a finding on the emergence of identifiable goods in terms of tariff entry. This aspect cannot be gone into by the Tribunal at this stage as it requires scrutiny of documentary evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
