Central excise duty on fabricated steel structures cannot survive for an intervening period when identical adjoining periods were already decided for the assessee.

Central excise duty on fabrication of steel structures for transmission line and tower components was held unsustainable where the Tribunal had already decided the same levy in the assessee's favour for adjoining periods and the duty paid for those periods had been refunded. In the absence of any material justifying a different view for the intervening period, the demand confirmed under the impugned order was quashed and any duty paid under that order was directed to be refunded.

---

---

Issues: Whether excise duty could be levied on fabrication of steel structures cleared from the workshop and whether the demand confirmed under the impugned order was sustainable.

Analysis: The challenge concerned the levy of central excise duty on fabrication activity undertaken for transmission line and tower components. The Court noted that, for the same assessee and on the same issue for periods immediately before and after the disputed period, the Tribunal had already held in favour of the assessee and the duty paid had been refunded. In that setting, the Court found no justifiable basis to sustain the levy for the intervening period.

Conclusion: The impugned demand was quashed and the duty, if paid under the impugned order, was directed to be refunded to the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the same levy on identical activity has already been rejected for adjoining periods and the materials do not justify a different view, the demand cannot be sustained for the intervening period.

---