9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et aside - Appeal No. E/122/2002-NBC - Final Order No. A/412/03-NB(C) - Dated:- 18-12-2002 - [Order]-Appellant filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise whereby the Central Excise duty of Rs. 43, 71,452/- was confirmed and penalty of Rs. 4, 50,000/- was imposed on the ground that appellants had carried out fabricatiod and assem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers (India) Pvt. Ltd. therefore, no duty can be demanded from the appellants. For this, appellant relied upon the following decisions of the Tribunal: 1. J.S.T. Engineering Services v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur, reported in 2001 (133) E.L.T. 350 (Tri- Del.) 2. Dempo Engg. Services v. Collector of Central Excise Customs, Goa, reported in 2001 (44) RLT 105 (CEGAT-Mum.) 3. SR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence that goods are marketable as M/s. Ambika Solvex Limited sold Solvent Extraction Plant to M/s. Sagar Solvex Nimbatheda. In respect of the issue regarding who is the manufacturer, the contention of the Revenue is that the appellants arranged the labour and other utility iike electricity etc. for carrying out fabrication assembly at their sight. Therefore, the appellants are manufacturer of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntral Excise, Jamshedpur (Supra) held that when the contract indicates that the actual work of fabrication is carried out, then the job worker is the manufacturer even if the raw material is supplied by the assessee. The Tribunal in the case of Dempo Engg. Services v. Collector of Central Excise Customs, Goa, (Supra) taken the same view. The Tribunal held that in case the goods were fabricated b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
