Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1989 (2) TMI 233

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n excisable goods and set aside the Assistant Collector s order dated 24.9.80 charging duty on a quantity of such goods and imposing a penalty of Rs. 2000 on the respondents under the provisions of Central Excise law. 2. This appeal had been heard on 23.5.88 when orders were reserved. However, both sides had requested that in the event of there being a previous decision having a bearing on the issue, they might be heard again so as to enable them to make submissions with reference to the decision. When the file was taken up for dictation of orders, it was noticed that there was a previous decision of the Tribunal having a bearing on the issue involved in the present appeal. In the circumstances, the appeal was heard again with reference t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t the facts of the present case are distinguishable. In the instant case, it was not as if goods completely manufactured in all respects and fit for marketing were scrapped. The defects in the nature of cracks and bends developed in the poles in the course of manufacture. In other words, they had not reached the stage of completion of manufacture and the stage of marketability unlike in the Orient Presstressed Products case where a certain quantity of fully manufactured poles had been drawn for test purposes. The said previous decision of the Tribunal is, therefore, of no help to the Revenue. 5. On the other hand, Special Bench B of this Tribunal had occasion to consider a somewhat similar issue in Collector of Central Excise v. General .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the course of manufacture. If anything, the case for not levying duly on the subject goods is much stronger than in the case of General Cement Products Pvt. Ltd. (supra). 6. Smt. Zutshi drew our attention to the Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Collector according to which the respondents had admitted that the broken poles had been used by them within the factory premises in foundation, fencing etc. The fact that the broken poles were put to some use and might conceivably also have had some commercial value would not, in our opinion, detract from the finding we have already recorded that the subject goods had not reached the stage of fully manufactured goods ready for marketing. 7. Smt. Zutshi submitted that the goods were lia .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates