Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2005 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (6) TMI 360 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
Contestation of duty and penalty imposition based on the appellants being held as manufacturers of P.C.C. Poles due to machinery ownership and raw material supply. Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal contested the correctness of the order confirming duty and penalty on the appellants. The main contention was regarding the appellants being wrongly considered as manufacturers of P.C.C. Poles due to the machinery installed in a factory leased to another firm. The appellants argued that the factory, along with machinery, was leased to the firm engaged in manufacturing, and supply of poles was against payment, making them not liable for duty. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative (D.R.) argued that the appellants supplied raw material to the firm, justifying their classification as manufacturers. The appellants presented an Agreement with the firm, showing the lease of the factory for P.C.C. Pole manufacturing without any clause regarding raw material supply. The absence of credible evidence supporting raw material supply was noted, leading to the conclusion that the firm was the actual manufacturer. The firm had filed a declaration with Central Excise authorities and was availing SSI exemption, further supporting their status as the manufacturer. Consequently, the impugned order confirming duty and penalty on the appellants was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with appropriate relief as per law. This judgment highlights the importance of contractual agreements and tangible evidence in determining liability for duty and penalties in excise matters. The ownership of machinery and the nature of transactions, such as lease agreements and supply arrangements, play a crucial role in establishing the responsibility of manufacturing and tax obligations. The Tribunal's decision emphasizes the need for clear documentation and substantiated claims to avoid erroneous impositions of duties and penalties on parties not directly involved in manufacturing activities.
|