New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (1) TMI 435 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (1) TMI 435 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (332) E.L.T. 765 (Tri. - Del.) - Duty demand - Removal of towers for testing - whether the appellant's are liable to pay duty on the tower manufactured, and send for destructive testing - Held that:- Unless the towers undergo destructive testing they are not saleable to the buyer/Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. Thus if not saleable, it only means that the process of manufacture is incomplete and the duty of excise is not leviable on them. Mer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot be said that appellants have cleared any goods liable to duty. - Impugned order is not sustainable - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. E/2728/2007-EX(DB) - Final Order No. A/53319/2015-EX(DB) - Dated:- 19-10-2015 - Sulekha Beevi C S, Member (J) And B. Ravichandran, Member (T) For the Appellant : Shri Bipin Garg, Adv For the Respondent : Shri S Nunthuk, JCDR ORDER Per Sulekha Beevi CS The appellant is engaged in manufacture and supply of towers to Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasarn Nigam .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

om the buyer i.e. charges for testing of towers upto destruction including cost of tower, the appellants are liable to pay central excise duty on the towers removed for testing. A show cause notice dated 5.12.2006 was issued proposing recovery of duty, with interest and penalty. The appellants contested the notice stating that as the said towers have been destroyed during testing, there is no liability to pay duty. After adjudication the order passed confirmed the duty demand, interest and penal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ying out tests, or any other process not amounting to manufacture. There is no dispute that the goods were removed for job work/testing according to the provisions of law. It is the case of the department that as the appellants have received the value of the tower including cost of testing from the buyer, they are liable to pay the excise duty. It is not disputed that the goods were removed for testing. It is also not disputed that in the process of testing the goods/towers were destroyed and we .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ational Ltd. for destructive testing in a knocked down condition and undeniably goods at that stage were not excisable goods. As per law, central Excise duty is chargeable only on excisable goods. 5. Further the contract entered between the parties for supply of towers, stipulates that the towers should undergo quality control testing/destructive testing. As this requirement is compulsory, unless the towers satisfy the technical specifications including that of destructive testing, they cannot b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version