1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- 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.
<h1>Tribunal: Repair of transformers /= manufacturing, no duty liability. Revenue's demand overturned.</h1> The Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s. Accurate Transformers Ltd., stating that repair of transformers does not constitute manufacturing. Therefore, no duty ... Manufacture Issues: Duty liability on bought out items used for repair of transformers.In the appeal filed by M/s. Accurate Transformers Ltd., the main issue was whether they were required to discharge duty liability on the bought-out items used for the repair of transformers. The appellants, who manufacture electric transformers, used components for repair, some with Modvat credit of duty and some without. The Revenue demanded central excise duty, considering the repair activity as manufacturing. The Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the duty payment based on previous decisions. However, the appellants argued that repair did not amount to manufacturing, and duty was not payable on components without Modvat credit. The Tribunal agreed with the appellants, emphasizing that repair did not constitute manufacturing, thus no duty was payable on repaired transformers. Citing a Supreme Court case, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal.