2006 (6) TMI 452

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der]. -  Heard both sides.  This is a claim of refund for Rs. 2,87,474/-. The appellant is M/s. Maharashtra State Electricity Board constituted under Sec. 5 of the Electricity Supply Act of 1948 and are functioning in the state of Maharashtra under the directions of the State Government. They are engaged in the manufacture of electricity and supply thereof to the consumers. 2. In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellants.  Therefore amount deposited under protest became refundable.  The refund claim was sanctioned by the Dy. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Ahmednagar Division, Ahmednagar vide order-in-original No. 64/Ref./1999 dated 18-11-1999.  The department has preferred review application under Sec. 35E(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with the Commissioner  of Cen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The appellants main contention is that the activity carried on by them does not amount to manufacture and as such no duty liability arises. Several decisions have been cited in the memorandum of appeal. It is contended further that it is a settled law that for the purpose of charging excise on goods in terms of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the criterion of 'excisability' as well as 'market .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X