Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Latest Cases

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (8) TMI 256

..... tory and transferred to their customer’s site but failed to discharge duty on the entire goods used in the turnkey projects - HELD THAT:- No evidence has been placed by the Revenue that the chlorination plant erected and commissioned at site could easily be unassembled and shifted to other place without causing damage to the components and plant as a whole, hence, be considered as movable one. The chlorination plant installed at various sites out of the goods manufactured and cleared by the appellant from their factory on payment of excise duty and assembling with other bought out items at the site of the customer, resulted into an immovable property and hence not leviable to excise duty - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 292 of 2011, 293 of 2011, 294 of 2011, 308 of 2011 - A/86337-86340/2019 - 2-8-2019 - Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) And Mr. P. Anjani Kumar, Member (Technical) Shri Prashant Paranjape, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Sanjay Hasija, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER: DR. D.M. MISRA These four appeals are filed against order-in-original No. 266/11/V/2010/Commr/KS dated 15.11.2010 passed by the Commissi .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... or immovable property, hence not chargeable to duty of excise. It is further observed that the adjudicating authority has held that the commodity in question is excisable goods without examination the manner in which it had taken shape and came into existence, regardless of the guidelines laid down and illustrations mentioned in the Board circular dated 15.01.2002. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to decide the issue afresh to examine whether the commodity in question would fit into the parameter of immovable property. Further, the Tribunal had observed that this exercise may call for physical inspection also. The learned Advocate has submitted that even though in the order, the Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority for physical inspection of the chlorination plant installed at various sites, however, the de novo order was issued by the Commissioner without undertaking the exercise of physical inspection of the chlorination plant, hence, the order issued by the adjudicating authority is bad in law. Reiterating their submission before the authorities below, the appellant narrating the process undertaken by the appellant at site for .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... arantee test is then carried out as per the approved procedure for testing the system at the operating parameters specified by the customers in their technical procurement specification. xi) A complete chlorination plant is approximately 50 meter in length, 15 meter in width and 6 meter in height (erected at the site of NPCIL Mecon Ltd. At Tarapur). The biggest size of the chlorinator manufactured by the Appellants is 800 milimeter x 800 milimeter x 1750 milimeter in size. The evaporators are also similar in size. xii) The manufacture of the chlorinator, evaporator and trunnion rollers takes approximately 3 to 4 months whereas the erection of a plant/system as a whole takes approximately 9 to 12 months. The Appellant during the course of hearing invited attention of the Hon ble Tribunal to the drawings of chlorination plant system, namely, P & ID; Plan of Equipment and Piping Layout and Sectional Views of Equipment and Piping Layout. 5. Referring to the Board s circular dated 15.01.2002, the learned Advocate has submitted that in the aforesaid circular, it has been clarified that the turnkey projects are immovable in nature and hence not excisable. The appellant has undertaken .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... rd both sides and perused the records. 9. This is the second round of litigation before this Tribunal. In the earlier round, this Tribunal by its order dated 8th September 2009 remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to examine the issue in the light of the guidelines laid down and illustrations given in the Circular dated 15.01.2002 issued by Board. Also, it was directed that if necessary, physical inspection could be undertaken by the adjudicating authority in deciding the issue. Pursuant to the said direction, the adjudicating authority considered the whole issue again, but without undertaking any physical inspection of various turnkey projects. The adj. authority has observed that the plant erected by the appellant at various sites are excisable goods, hence, leviable to duty. 10. We have carefully examined the contention of the appellant and find that the appellant is engaged in assembly of chlorination plant at various sites on turnkey basis. The following photographs produced during the course of hearing reveal that the plant has come into existence only after assembly of various individual components which were grouted to the earth and civil foundations on permane .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... xistence unless all the parts are put together and embedded in the civil work. Waste water treatment plant does not become a plant until the process which includes the civil work, is completed. In our view, therefore, no commercial movable property came into existence until the assembling was completed by embedding different parts in the civil works. 11. Similarly, in Ion Exchange Ltd. s case (supra), by a majority, it has been held that manufacture of water treatment plant at the site by assembly and installation of various individual components would result into emergence of an immovable property, hence, not leviable to duty. The said judgment was later followed for the subsequent period. In Chemtec Water Conditioners case (supra) also, the question was whether water treatment plant, which is firmly and permanently attached by way of civil construction to earth, is liable to excise duty or otherwise. Following the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court, this Tribunal observed that after being permanently grouted/embedded to earth, it loses the character of movability and thus becomes immovable, accordingly, non-excisable. 12. In the present case also, no evidence has been placed b .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||