2007 (2) TMI 55 - AT - Central Excise

Manufacture Revenue holding that the activity of fabrication of various structures amount to manufactures and accordingly demands were made Authority considering that the demand is time barred and set aside the demand

Summary

Issues:
1. Time-barred demands
2. Classification of fabricated structures as manufacture
3. Imposition of penalty

Analysis:

1. Time-barred demands:
The learned Counsel argues that the demands are barred by time, as the show cause notice was issued after the period in question. Referring to the Nizam Sugar Factory case, it is contended that since the Department was aware of the facts and had issued a show cause notice earlier, the demands are time-barred. The Counsel also highlights contradictory judgments by different benches, emphasizing that there was no willful suppression of facts in this case. Ultimately, the demands in certain appeals are set aside based on the time-barred argument.

2. Classification of fabricated structures as manufacture:
The Tribunal finds that the activity of fabrication of steel structures amounts to manufacture, classifying the items under a specific sub-heading of the Central Excise Tariff. While referencing the Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. case, the Tribunal distinguishes other judgments and holds that the goods in question are indeed manufactured. Despite arguments from the Department, the Tribunal rules in favor of the assessee on this issue.

3. Imposition of penalty:
The Revenue appeals seeking imposition of penalty for the activity of fabrication of structures. However, the Tribunal notes that no penalty was imposed in the initial order. The judgment does not address the imposition of penalty further, focusing primarily on the time-barred demands and the classification of the fabricated structures.

In conclusion, the Tribunal sets aside certain demands as time-barred, rules in favor of the assessee regarding the classification of manufactured goods, and dismisses the Revenue's appeals. The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the legal arguments presented by both sides and references relevant case law to support its conclusions.