TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal affirms exemption for fabricated ducts under Chapter Heading 73.08</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, COIMBATORE Versus BATLIBAI & CO.</h3> The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision to grant the exemption under Notification No. 61/90-C.E. to the appellant, holding that ducts fabricated ... Classification Issues:Interpretation of Notification No. 61/90-C.E. regarding exemption for goods fabricated at the site of construction work for use in construction work.Analysis:The case involved two Revenue appeals challenging an Order-in-Original where the Commissioner had dropped proceedings initiated by a show cause notice regarding the grant of benefit under Notification No. 61/90-C.E. The notification exempted goods fabricated at the site of construction work for use in such work from excise duty. The Commissioner held that ducts, classified under Chapter 7308.90, were eligible for the exemption as they were prefabricated structures. The Commissioner also clarified that the term 'construction work' included the installation of machinery/plant, not just buildings or structures. The Commissioner concluded that no duty was demandable from the appellant and imposed a penalty on another party. The Revenue contended that the notification's benefit was restricted to goods fabricated at the site for use in construction work only, not for machinery/plant use. The Revenue argued that ducts were manufactured for a humidification plant, not construction work, and thus not eligible for the exemption.The Tribunal considered the arguments and cited a previous judgment where ducts were classified as parts of structures under Chapter Heading 73.08 and eligible for the exemption. The Tribunal noted that the term 'construction work' in the notification was not restricted to buildings or structures but included machinery/plant installation. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's findings, emphasizing that there was no restriction on the term 'construction work at site.' The Tribunal concluded that the issue was settled law and rejected the Revenue's appeals. The Tribunal's detailed analysis highlighted the classification of ducts and ducts' supports under Chapter Heading 73.08, emphasizing that they were parts of structures and eligible for the exemption under the notification. The Tribunal's decision was based on the understanding that ducts and ducts' supports were fabricated at the plant site and fell under Chapter Heading 73.08, making them eligible for the exemption benefit.In summary, the Tribunal's judgment affirmed the Commissioner's decision to grant the exemption under Notification No. 61/90-C.E. to the appellant, emphasizing that the term 'construction work' encompassed machinery/plant installation. The Tribunal's detailed analysis of the classification of ducts under Chapter Heading 73.08 supported the conclusion that they were eligible for the exemption as parts of structures fabricated at the plant site. The Tribunal's decision relied on established legal principles and previous judgments, ultimately rejecting the Revenue's appeals and upholding the benefit of the notification for the appellant.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
