2002 (11) TMI 100 - SC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal regarding the demand of duty on the erection of a ropeway for carrying passengers.

Judgment Summary:

Issue 1: Manufacturing activity under Central Excise Act, 1944
The appeals were filed against the Tribunal's decision setting aside the duty demand on the erection of a ropeway, stating it was not a manufacturing activity under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal's decision was based on the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Mittal Engineering Works (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut [1996 (88) E.L.T. 622], which emphasized that goods attached to the earth and not capable of being brought to the market are not assessable to excise duty. The Court reiterated that the erection and installation of a plant cannot be considered excisable goods, as it would broaden the scope to include structures and installations, contrary to the accepted meaning of excisable goods. The Court found the same position applicable in the present case and dismissed the appeals.

This judgment highlights the interpretation of the term 'manufacturing activity' under the Central Excise Act, emphasizing the marketability and mobility of goods for excise duty assessment.