2001 (8) TMI 735 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether duty should be demanded from the appellants for manufacturing goods through contractors.
2. Whether the goods manufactured in the premises are exempted under Notification No. 217/86.
3. Whether the demand is time-barred.

Analysis:
1. The first issue revolves around the contention that the job workers and contractors are the actual manufacturers, not the appellants. The statements of job workers and contractors admitted to manufacturing goods supplied by the appellants. The company officials also confirmed this arrangement. The appellants failed to provide contracts for verification. The tribunal upheld that the duty is payable by the appellants as they were considered the manufacturers due to the control and supply of materials.

2. Regarding the second issue of exemption under Notification No. 217/86, the appellants relied on a tribunal decision for exemption. However, a contrary view was presented in another tribunal decision, where it was held that certain items were excluded from the notification as they were considered material handling equipment used in the manufacturing process. Based on this, the plea for exemption was rejected.

3. The final issue of time-barred demand was raised by the appellants. It was found that they did not file a Classification List with the Central Excise authorities, and their claim of the Department's awareness lacked evidence. The adjudicating authority upheld that the appellants had suppressed information and evaded duty, leading to the rejection of the appeal on all grounds.

In conclusion, the appellate tribunal rejected the appeal, confirming the demand for duty from the appellants for manufacturing goods through contractors, denying the exemption claim under Notification No. 217/86, and upholding the time-barred demand due to the appellants' failure to disclose relevant information.