9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required for such fabrication work. These facts were corroborated by the Dy. Manager (Commercial) of the appellant-firm and the representative of the fabricators in their statements recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appellant, however, did not file any classification or price declaration as envisaged under Rules 173B and 173C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 nor did they file any statutory returns in respect of the said activity. Therefore, a show cause notice dated 08/03/2001 for recovery of duty amounting to Rs. 18,43,877/- was issued along with interest thereon. The notice was adjudicated upon and the duty demands were confirmed along with interest and also by imposing equivalent amount of penalty under Section 11AC. The appellant preferred an appeal before the lower appellate authority. They submitted that the demand is time-barred inasmuch as the show cause notices were issued after a lapse of more than six months. Secondly, it was argued that since the trolleys and racks were consumed within the factory production, they are eligible for the benefit of duty exemption under Notification NO. 67/95-CE dated 16/03/1995. These contentions of the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned demands are not sustainable. 4. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue, on the other hand, contends that in the present case, the appellant has supplied not only raw materials but also all consumables and the goods have been manufactured in the appellant's own premises. The fabricators have supplied only labour and the goods were manufactured as per the drawings and instructions of the appellant and, therefore, the appellant is liable to pay excise duty on the racks and trolleys fabricated by the fabricators. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Maruti Udyog Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi 2001 (134) ELT 188 (Tri. Del.) wherein it was held that when fabrication work is undertaken by the job-workers out of raw materials supplied by a person in its factory, the fabricators are only hired labour and not independent manufacturers. 4.1 As regards the benefit of Notification claimed under Notification No.67/95-CE, it is urged that the appellant also manufactures goods falling under Chapter 55 in addition to goods falling under Chapter 51. Since Chapter 55 is not notified as final products in the said Noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... guishable and hence it has to be held that the appellant is the manufacturer and not the fabricators. 5.2 An identical issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Maruti Udyog Ltd. wherein Maruti Udyog Ltd. got fabrication of trolleys, bins and pallets in their factory premises by certain fabricators. Further, Maruti Udyog Ltd. supplied raw materials and consumables. In that context, this Tribunal held as follows:- "Fabrication of the items in dispute was not only carried out by the three different job workers within the factory premises of the appellants, but also on their shop floor itself. The appellants supplied all the raw materials for fabrication/repair/modification as well as the samples like welding electrodes, gas, paint, primer, thinner etc. They were also to make available to the fabricator, the slot milling machine and the Key- way Milling machine without any charges. The Terms and Conditions of the various work orders clearly spell out a master and servant relationship between the appellants on one hand and the fabricators on the other, as not only did the appellants have the right to tell the fabricators what to do, but also how to do it. In other words, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts - (i) capital goods as defined in rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production; (ii) goods specified in column (2) of the Table hereto annexed (hereinafter referred to as 'inputs') manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production in or in relation to manufacture of final products specified in column (3) of the said Table; from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon which is specified in the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) : Provided that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products (other than those cleared either to a unit in a Free Trade Zone or to a 100% Export Oriented Undertaking or to a unit in an Electronic Hardware Technology Park or to a unit in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
