2009 (4) TMI 364 - AT - Central Excise

Excisability- item cannot be removed without cannibalization. Joint technical manager stated that while removing kitchen cabinets and wardrobes, the granite, marine ply and side penal of corner units were damaged and were replaced with new items. Principle laid down by Supreme Court on cannibalization failed. It cannot be said that kitchen unit installed is movable. It cannot be dismantled as such and moved to another place. Kitchen unit appears to be custom designed. Cabinet unit designed for one flat may not be suitable for any other flat of different dimension. Commissioner not properly appreciated facts. impugned item not excisable. Appeal allowed.

Summary

In the appellate tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore case citation 2009 (4) TMI 364, the appeal was made against the Order-in-Original No. 30/2007 by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-I Commissionerate. The appellant argued that the case of the Revenue was based on a previous decision which was overturned by the Apex Court, and that the latest Tribunal's order supported their case. They presented various cases where similar items were deemed non-excisable. The appellant also argued that the items in question were immovable property and not excisable goods, citing Supreme Court judgments and Board Circulars. The appellant contended that substantial damage would result if the items were removed and that they were paying service tax for construction services. The Departmental Representative argued that the items were removable based on customer statements. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the items could not be removed without cannibalization and were therefore not excisable. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed. The ruling was pronounced on 27-4-2009.