Erected lift as immovable property not excisable; complete installation removes goods character for duty purposes.

A fully erected and installed lift, once embedded in a building, ceases to retain the character of movable goods and becomes part of the immovable property. Applying the settled excisability test, an article is liable to excise only if, after assembly or erection, it remains marketable as goods; a commissioned lift in that condition is not exigible to duty under Tariff Item No. 68. The discussion also notes that the separate question whether individual lift parts may be excisable was not decided, and that the demand based on contract value and erection-related charges was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether erection and installation of lifts as a whole constituted excisable goods liable to duty under Tariff Item No. 68, and whether the cost of construction and related erection charges could be included in the assessable value.

Analysis: The lift system, after erection and installation in the building, became part of the immovable property and did not retain the character of movable goods. Applying the settled test that an article is excisable only if, after assembly or erection, it continues to be goods capable of being regarded as marketable, the Court held that a fully erected and commissioned lift embedded in the building was not dutiable. The Court also noted that the dispute as to excisability of separate lift parts was not being decided in the writ petition.

Conclusion: The erection and installation of a lift as a whole was held not to be excisable under Tariff Item No. 68, and the impugned demand based on contract value and erection-related charges was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an article, after complete erection and installation, becomes an immovable part of the building, it ceases to be goods and is not exigible to excise duty.

---