Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 281/86 dated 24-4-86 was available to goods manufactured in the factory and used within the factory for repair or maintenance of machinery, despite the goods not being made in a separate workshop.
Analysis: The notification exempted excisable goods manufactured in a workshop within the factory and intended for use in the same factory for repair or maintenance. The expression "workshop" had already been interpreted in the appellant's own case to mean the factory as a whole and not a confined tool room. Following that interpretation, goods manufactured within the factory and used for repair or maintenance inside the factory were covered by the exemption even if they were not produced in a separate workshop in the strict sense.
Conclusion: The exemption under Notification No. 281/86 dated 24-4-86 was available to the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification using the expression "workshop" may be applied to the factory as a whole where prior binding interpretation has given that expression a wider meaning, and the exemption cannot be denied merely because the goods were not manufactured in a separate workshop in the strict sense.