Immovable plant is not excisable goods, so central excise duty and related penalty were unsustainable.

A plant assembled at the factory site and firmly attached to the earth was treated as part of immovable property, not as "goods" under central excise law. On that basis, it could not fall within Item 68 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, and no excise duty was payable. Because the article was not excisable goods, the duty demand was unsustainable and the connected penalty order also failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a plant assembled at the factory site and firmly attached to the earth could be treated as goods liable to central excise duty under Item 68 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.

Analysis: The plant was assembled at site from parts and materials and had become part of the immovable property. A plant so erected and firmly attached to the earth could not be regarded as "goods" for the purpose of excise levy. Since the article was not excisable goods, the question of duty did not arise and the connected penalty order also could not stand.

Conclusion: The plant was not liable to central excise duty and the demand and penalty were unsustainable.

---