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

2011 (4) TMI 392

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tice R.M.S. Khandeparkar :- Heard DR for the appellants and none present for the respondent though served. A letter has been placed on record received from M/s Havells India Ltd. The letter is dated 5th April 2011. It has been stated in the said letter that notice addressed to respondent was received in their office at SP-215, MIA, Alwar (Rajasthan). It is further stated in the letter that the said premises are purchased by M/s Havells India Ltd. under sale deed dated 11th August 2004. They have also informed that the notice received by them was sent to M/s Telemats India Ltd. by speed post at their address available with the said company. They have further stated that at the time of purchase of the premises they were issued certificat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , I, thus conclude that the items in question were nothing but Towers and Lattice Mast made of Iron Steel, falling under sub-heading No. 7308.20, which is found to be most appropriate sub-heading for the purpose of Classification of Tower and Lattice Masts . I, thus, hold that the product cleared by the assessee during the period in question was classifiable under Chapter sub-heading No. 7308.20 attracting therein Central Excise Duty @ 15% instead of 13% as paid by the assessee. I, accordingly find that the differential duty @ 2% Adv. is recoverable from the assessee. Hence, I find no force in the contention made by the assessee in this regard, as well as case laws relied upon by them. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) while relying upon .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g Authority to be confirmed. 6. In Mahindra Mahindra Ltd. case, Larger Bench had held thus : 10. There can be no dispute over the proposition that? immovable property, be it immovable steel structure embedded in earth or a constructed building, cannot be subjected to excise duty which applies to excisable goods, i.e. to movables. In the making of an immovable structure or building are used a variety of movable. Raising iron and steel structures like sheds involves fabrication work and many of the articles used in raising the structure come into existence through fabrication as per the pre-determined design to be fitted into the structure that is to be raised. For example, roof frame may be fabricated for the roof structure of a sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ubes, plates etc. to bring about a distinct commodity will surely amount to manufacture as it is not mere drilling holes or cutting, but the activity is aimed at bringing about a distinct commodity. Thus, making of porta cabin from iron and steel angles with, roof frame-work i.e. trusses, doors, windows, ladders in it made by drilling holes and cutting the raw material, will be a movable structure having identity as a distinct marketable commodity. When the porta cabin is dismantled it nonetheless remains the manufactured products i.e. porta cabin dismantled or disassembled. The material such as angles, rods, shades, sections plates, tubes, etc. of such designed structure in their pre-assembled or disassembled form are prepared for use in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ture will run counter to the legislative intent to impose excise duty on such excisable goods at a stage when they have a separate identity as marketable goods anterior to their being permanently fixed in the immovable structure . 7. Matter involving similar facts came up for hearing in RPG Transmission Ltd. case and relying upon the Larger Bench decision the activities in the nature of erection of tower were held to be amounting to manufacture. 8. For erecting Tower and Lattice Mast by the appellants, the inputs used include M.S. Round, Bar, Pipes, Steel Tubes, Flats, Angles Shapes Sections, Plates, Sheets, Strips etc. These materials are cut to the required sizes and punching, drilling and wielding are done and thereafter stampi .....

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