9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order as disposal of the appeal on merits and that the remand was only for the purpose of deciding the penalties supported by proper finding. Accordingly, the order of the original authority as well as the impugned order deal with only the penal liability of the appellants. The initial order passed by the Joint Commissioner had confirmed the allegation that the appellants had engaged in manufacture and clearance of excisable goods without following the Central Excise formalities. It was found that during the period 04/93 to 12/93 M/s. S & S Industries and Enterprises Ltd., Chennai, the appellants herein, had manufactured and cleared paddle wheel aerators, water purifiers, water softeners and iron removers, without taking a registration from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad received the impugned goods in disassembled condition for convenience of transport. This position had been testified by one of the suppliers who had been cross-examined before the original authority. The depositions on record did not support a finding of manufacture arrived at by the lower authority. 3. The ld. SDR reiterates the findings contained in the impugned order. 4. I have carefully considered the case records and submissions by both sides. From the Final Order No. 780/02 dated 11-7-02, I find that the appeal of the assessee had been disposed by the Tribunal with the following findings and directions. "Ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that the orders of the adjudicating and first appellate authorities are not speaking or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the Goods Receipt Notes maintained by the appellants had shown that they had received only the components. The appellants had assembled and tested the impugned goods before clearance. The appellants had received incomplete/unfinished goods with essential character of the complete article. The assessee had converted them into complete/finished articles. Note 6 of Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, prescribed that in respect of goods covered by Section XVI, conversion of an article with the essential character of the complete article into finished articles, would amount to manufacture. The Joint Commissioner decided that the assessee had undertaken the manufacture of the impugned goods following the above section Note. 4.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
