9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 451X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per : V.K. Asthana, Member (T)]. - The short point in dispute in this appeal against Order-in-Original No. 4/99, dated 30-9-1999 is whether the DG set manufactured by the appellants for captive consumption came into existence as a fully manufactured excisable goods before 1-3-1994 or not. While appellants claim that the statutory testing of the DG set as per the Indian Electricity Act was done ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ully operational and safe for this purpose. These testings were carried on from 1-3-1994 onwards and a certificate of passing the test has been given by the said authorities on 19-3-1994. Therefore, in view of the Tribunal decision in the case of Union Carbide Ltd. v. CCE as in 1994 (74) E.L.T. 381 (T) which had held that the term manufacture includes any process or incidental or ancillary to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to why the ratio of the said decision would not be applicable to the facts of this case. To that extent, the order impugned is a non- speaking order. He submits that in view of these two decisions cited, the date of manufacture and completion of manufacture of DG set should only be after all tests were satisfied and a certificate was issued by the relevant authority under the Indian Electricity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e prior to that and the duty exemption would not be available to such deemed removal. 5. We have carefully considered these submissions and records of the case. On a perusal of the order impugned, we find that while ld. Original authority has recorded the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Union Carbide Ltd. (supra) cited before him, there is not even a sentence of discussion thereon as to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the appellants in the matter and while considering the matter de novo, he shall also proceed to examine the issue of the point at which the said DG sets would have attained the status of a fully manufactured excisable goods, i.e. to fix the date on which the RG 1 point was reached. In doing so, he shall consider the two decisions of the Tribunal cited above and analyse the same with respect to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
