9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (5) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kilometres into the sea. On this jetty is located an unloading arm which is, we are told that, some kind of crane. By use of this unloading arm, the pipes laid on the jetty and connected to tanks containing ethylene in the tankers ethylene is transported through this flexible pipe to the pipe on the jetty which transports it to the tanks located kilometre and a half away. The question for consideration in these appeals is whether the parts of the moving arm that the appellant received and installed are capital goods, and whether the duty paid on these parts will be available to it as credit in terms of Rule 57Q (for part of the period) and Rule 57AA of the rules for some part of the period. In the common order impugned in these appeals (eac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being included within the term "factory" as defined in Section 2(e) of the Act which reads : "Any premises, including the precincts thereof, wherein or in any part of which excisable goods other than salt are manufactured or wherein or in any part of which any manufacturing process connected with the production of these goods is being carried on or is ordinarily carried on." 3. The departmental representative, in addition to emphasising the point that has been relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals), relies upon the decision of the Larger Bench in Vikas Industrial Gas v. CCE - 2000 (118) E.L.T. 257. 4. We do not find it possible to accept the view of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the order impugned before us, that merely because ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mills v. CCE to the fact that the factory premises approved by the department did not specifically exclude this jetty. Approval of any premises is in any event is not a requirement for considering the factory and demanding duty on the goods manufactured therein. In that event, the person who manufacture and clear them without payment of duty by suppressing it would successfully claim that since the premises in which the manufacturing of the goods were not manufactured in a factory. In other words, it would be safe to say that the fact of manufacturing the premises would determine the factory and not the contrary. 5. The facts before us are clear that the entire land up to on which the foot of the jetty is situated belongs to the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
