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

1999 (11) TMI 182

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he erstwhile Central Excise Tariff (for the period prior to 28-2-1986). 2. Shri K.K. Anand, learned Advocate, submitted that the appellant No. 1, manufacture Cast Iron Castings; that prior to 1-8-1988, they were manufacturing steel castings also; that the manufacture of steel castings was stopped as a result of fire in their factory; that they do not have any facility for complete machinery of the castings except for fettling, proof machining, surface cleaning; that central excise duty demand for the period from 1-9-1984 to 31-1-1988 has been imposed on the ground that they had received specific orders for parts/components of machinery from their customers and had manufactured the same either in their factory or got the goods fully manufa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r Heading 73.25 of CETA. The learned Advocate also referred to the statement dated 11-7-1988 of Shri S.M. Bhatia, partner of appellant No. 1, in which he had deposed that they supplied castings at the rate specified in the contract and in cases where the castings had to be machined, the same were sent by them after payment of duty on labour basis to other workshops. The learned Advocate also mentioned that the order passed by the Assistant Collector was not reviewed and as such the Collector should not have disregarded the said order. He finally submitted that they were eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 77/83 for the financial year 1984-85 as the value of their clearances was only Rs. 36.56 lakhs in 1983-84, the total value of cl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... manufacture of various machinery parts/components as per specifications and designs of their customers like, M/s. Saurastra Chemicals Ltd., M/s. Apollo Earth Movers, etc.; that these were as complex parts of machinery as peddle arm, pulley, sproket hub, Cam wheel, etc., that even in contract the parties had stipulated their specifications as per ISI specifications. He also submitted that the buyers were using the goods as such without undertaking any process; that job workers had stated in their statements that all raw or semi-finished cast articles which were received by them for machining were returned under private challans to the appellant No. 1; that there was clear mention of machinery parts/components in their private records; that 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 Rule 2(a) does not permit to conclude that when an article squarely falls under a particular Tariff heading, it can be made to fall under another heading by invoking the concept of essential character. The same view was held by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Sikka Heat Treatment Centre - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 628 wherein it was held that rail clips will not fall for classification under item 68 of old Tariff and having regard to the process of manufacture, rail clips would be classifiable under item 26AA(ia)/25(8) of Old Central Excise Tariff as pieces roughly shaped by forging. The Supreme Court also upheld the classification of Elastic rail clips under Item 26AA(ia)/25(8) in Veekay Industries case, supra, after referring to decision in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es wherever the castings have been converted into machine parts/components by the job-workers, they will be the manufacturers and not the appellants and duty liability, if any, will be leviable on such job workers. The Appellants would be liable to pay duty, if any, only on the castings as per law. 6. We also observe that the demand has been raised and confirmed for the period from 1-9-1984 to 31-1-1988. If the appellants have manufactured any parts/components in their unit, and not castings only, the duty will be leviable on them after considering their eligibility for the benefit of exemption under Notification Nos. 77/83 and 175/86. The larger period of limitation for demanding duty on parts/components manufactured by the appellants, i .....

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