9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 586X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D.G. Sets at the premises in the year 1989 itself. Even the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Triveni Engg. (2000 (8) TMI 86 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA), which held against the assessee on merits, the benefit of limitation was given by observing that there cannot be any reason for suppression inasmuch as in terms of the Board’s Circular dated 6.11.86, which was withdrawn subsequently on 11.10.90, no duty was to be discharged on the combination of engine and alternators assembled. As such, we find no suppression can be attributed to the assessee so as to uphold the longer period of limitation. We have also seen the photographs produced before us which establish that D.G. Sets are used as D.G. sets spread over in a separate building. - Decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ach other and altered and grated with bolts. The entire D.G. sets, which comprised of a separate building, were erected and commissioned under the supervision of Tata Consultancy Engineers. The D.G. sets and alternators are placed on different foundations and rubber plants, which rubber plants were provided and alignment was done for diesel engine and alternator. After alignment, foundation bolts passing through base frames of Diesel Engine and alternators were tightened with the help of nuts. 4. The appellant, during the course of adjudication, took a plea before the Commissioner that inasmuch as the huge D.G. Sets, so erected by them, are attached to earth and are incapable of being brought and sold and as such, the same cannot be held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cision in the case of Vineet Electrical Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, BBSR-II - 2001 (136) ELT 784 (Tribunal-Kolkata). 7. We have gone through all the above referred and relied upon decisions. We are of the view that the facts in the present case are identical to the facts in the case of Western India Machinery Company (supra), which stands upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court. As regards the DR s reliance on the decision in the case of Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. (supra), we find that the same was considered by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Triveni Engg. Industries Ltd. (supra) and Triveni Engg. Industries Ltd. stands considered by the Tribunal in the case of Western India Machinery Company. Further, the decision of the Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver large area. The same are not portable D.G. sets which can come to market for being bought and sold. 10. Though we have held in favour of the assessee on merits, but duty of demand is also barred by limitation. As per the statement of Authorised Representative dated 19.10.2002, the jurisdictional Central Excise Authorities were informed about the intended fabrication of the D.G. Sets at the premises in the year 1989 itself. Even the Tribunal s decision in the case of Triveni Engg. (supra), which held against the assessee on merits, the benefit of limitation was given by observing that there cannot be any reason for suppression inasmuch as in terms of the Board s Circular dated 6.11.86, which was withdrawn subsequently on 11.10.90, no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
