9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (7) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (T)]. The appellants during the period 1981 to 1983 fabricated, assembled, erected and installed in their own factory three overhead cranes and two Cooling Plants. Show cause notice was issued to them alleging that they had evaded duty leviable on such goods captively consumed. Additional Collector in the impugned order held that cooling plants were not excisable and, therefore, no duty h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Tribunal in the case of Braithwaite Company Ltd. v. C.C.E., Calcutta-II, reported in 1987 (29) E.L.T. 251. Shri Saran appearing for the Revenue supports the impugned order. 3. We have carefully considered the pleas made before us and have seen the cited judgment. 4. The cited judgment deals with the inclusion of erection, installation and commissioning charges in the assessable value ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ituation is reproduced below :- It is correct that cranes falling under Heading 84.26 were specifically brought under the purview of the definition of machinery under Rule 57Q with effect from 16-3-1995. But it would not correct to say that its admissibility prior to this date did not exist. If such cranes performed functions narrated in the definition of capital goods in the said rule even pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e situation would be different if such cranes were to be used outside the manufacturing area, say for moving of fully finished goods from the bonded store rooms to the loading platform. Therefore, in each case the location as well as the utilisation of each machinery has to be examined to determine its admissibility under the impugned rules. Several plants have conveyor belts for moving the inproc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
