9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (12) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... engaged in the manufacture of combustion and diesel engines bearing brand name `Atul Shakti' for which it was duly licensed under the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 ('Act' for short). It also carried on trading in pumps. It entered into agreements with different units who were duly licensed under the Act for manufacturing pumps and power driven pumps. In October, 1977 the appellant was served with a show cause notice by the Central Excise Department that they got the power driven pumps manufactured with brand name `Atul Shakti' from the different manufacturing units who in fact were manufacturing these pumps on behalf of the appellant. In reply it was stated that the appellant had given raw materials to independent units who were not unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lously low that no independent unit manufactures a pump for such a low cost. 3. The exemption under Notification No. 85/72, dated 17th March 1972 was available for power driven pumps if the value did not exceed Rs. one lakh. This restriction was extended even if the pumps were got manufactured by others. In other words if value of the pumps sold by the appellant did not exceed Rupees One Lakh whether manufactured by the appellant or on its behalf by others, then only it was entitled to exemption. The appellant had cleared goods which exceeded Rupees One Lakh in the years in dispute. Therefore, it was not entitled to exemption unless the value of pumps manufactured by different parties under the agreement was excluded from its clearance. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant. The component unless processed did not result in production of pump. And that having been done by independent units for payment the finding that it was manufactured on behalf of the appellants without any material cannot be upheld. In fact, no such finding has been recorded by the Tribunal nor any material could be pointed out which could establish that it was the appellant who manufactured the pumps or the independent units from whom it got the pumps manufactured were doing so on behalf of the appellant. The Tribunal in extending the meaning of the expression 'manufacturing' on behalf of the appellant by introducing the concept of supply of components went beyond the ambit of the Notification. 4. In the result, this appeal su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
