1998 (7) TMI 154 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of Notification 281/86 regarding excisable goods manufactured in a workshop within a factory for maintenance.

Analysis:
1. Facts of the Case: The case involved manufacturers of cement availing the benefit of Notification 281/86 by using refractory bricks manufactured in their workshop for maintenance of furnaces in their factory.

2. Contentions: The Revenue sought to deny the benefit of the notification on grounds that refractory bricks were not capable of being manufactured in a workshop and were actually produced in the factory itself.

3. Appellant's Argument: The appellant's advocate relied on a Tribunal judgment in a similar case to support the contention that the benefit of the notification should be allowed.

4. Revenue's Argument: The Revenue argued that a distinction between a 'workshop' and a 'factory' must be made, and refractory bricks are not typically manufactured in a workshop.

5. Judgment: The Tribunal observed that the notification did not differentiate between types of excisable goods and applied to all goods manufactured in a workshop within a factory. The Tribunal held that the refractories manufactured in the workshop were entitled to the benefit under the notification. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's plea, emphasizing that a narrow interpretation of 'workshop' was unwarranted given the variety of excisable goods. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants.