2002 (11) TMI 387 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Central Excise Act, 1944 regarding dutiability of refrigeration/air-conditioning plants.
2. Consideration of Board's order and Tribunal's judgment by the original authority.
3. Decision on remanding the case for de novo consideration.

Analysis:
1. The issue in this case revolves around the interpretation of the Central Excise Act, 1944 concerning the dutiability of refrigeration/air-conditioning plants. The appellant's advocates highlighted a clarification by the Board stating that such plants are systems comprising various components and parts, which individually attract duty. However, the assembled system as a whole should not be considered excisable goods. They referred to a Tribunal judgment in a similar case where it was held that air-conditioning plants installed on a turnkey basis are not marketable and, therefore, not dutiable. The advocates argued that the original authority did not consider the Board's order and Tribunal's judgment, and thus, requested for the case to be remanded for fresh consideration.

2. The original authority, as per the submissions made by both sides, did not give due consideration to the Board's order dated 15-1-2002 and the Tribunal's judgment in the case of Blue Star Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur. The Appellate Tribunal, after reviewing the arguments presented, directed the original authority to reconsider the case in light of the Board's order and the Tribunal's judgment. The Tribunal found that the Board's clarification on refrigeration/air-conditioning plants had not been factored into the original decision, necessitating a fresh evaluation. The appellants were granted the opportunity to provide further submissions during the de novo proceedings.

3. Consequently, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for de novo consideration. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the original authority taking into account the Board's order and the Tribunal's judgment to arrive at a well-informed decision. The appellants were instructed to present any additional arguments they deemed necessary, and they were assured a fair hearing during the reconsideration of the case. The decision to remand the case was made to ensure a comprehensive review of all relevant factors and legal precedents before reaching a final determination.