Immovable coal handling plant outside excise duty where permanent civil structures and fixed components made it part of the earth.

A coal handling plant erected on a job contract basis was treated as immovable property, not excisable goods, because it comprised large civil structures, conveyor systems and supporting works spread over extensive land and had become part of the earth. Applying earlier Supreme Court and High Court decisions on substantially similar facts, the plant was held outside the charge of central excise duty. The disputed duty demand and penalty could not stand, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether a coal handling plant erected on job contract basis was excisable goods liable to central excise duty, or whether it was an immovable property outside the charge of excise.

Analysis: The plant in question was erected and assembled in the same manner as earlier coal handling plants considered in prior decisions involving the same appellant. The decisive factual features were that the plant consisted of large civil structures, conveyor systems and supporting civil works spread over extensive land, making it part of the earth rather than a movable marketable commodity. In light of the earlier Supreme Court and High Court decisions on substantially identical facts, the present plant was treated as falling within the same legal position.

Conclusion: The coal handling plant was not excisable goods and could not be subjected to the disputed excise duty demand and penalty.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal succeeded, with consequential relief to follow.

Ratio Decidendi: A plant assembled and erected with substantial civil structures and permanently affixed components, so as to become immovable property, is not excisable goods for the purpose of central excise duty.

---