9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - The short point required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the appellant is a manufacturer of the steel drums or the independent contractor with whom the appellant had entered into a contract is to be treated as the manufacturer of the steel drums in question. 2. Shri B.K. Munshi, ld. Consultant app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1999 (111) E.L.T. 72 (Tribunal). 3. We have also heard Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, ld. SDR for the Revenue who reiterates the reasoning of the Commissioner. 4. We have seen the contract entered into by the appellant with its contractor. The same is for fabrication of steel drums with various processes to be undertaken by the contractor mentioned therein. The specifications of the drums have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned order has observed that it is the appellant who have provided the space within their factory, raw materials and other infrastructural facilities to the contractor. However, there is no elaboration as to what other infrustructural facilities have been provided by the appellant to the said contractor. In these circumstances we fully agree with the ld. Advocate that mere providing of space, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew of the Apex Court judgments and the Tribunal's judgments noted above. In that view of the matter, the appeal succeeds both on merits and on time bar and hence the Appeal is allowed." 6. We find that similar set of facts and circumstances exist in the present case. Accordingly we hold that the appellant cannot be considered as a manufacturer. Accordingly the appeal is allowed with conseque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
