CESTAT Bangalore rules items not excisable as immovable property, sets aside Order-in-Original.

In the CESTAT Bangalore case citation 2009 (4) TMI 364, the tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant against the Order-in-Original No. 30/2007 by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-I Commissionerate. The tribunal held that the items in question were not excisable goods as they were immovable property and could not be removed without cannibalization. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed on 27-4-2009.

---

---

In the appellate tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore case citation 2009 (4) TMI 364, the appeal was made against the Order-in-Original No. 30/2007 by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-I Commissionerate. The appellant argued that the case of the Revenue was based on a previous decision which was overturned by the Apex Court, and that the latest Tribunal's order supported their case. They presented various cases where similar items were deemed non-excisable. The appellant also argued that the items in question were immovable property and not excisable goods, citing Supreme Court judgments and Board Circulars. The appellant contended that substantial damage would result if the items were removed and that they were paying service tax for construction services. The Departmental Representative argued that the items were removable based on customer statements. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the items could not be removed without cannibalization and were therefore not excisable. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed. The ruling was pronounced on 27-4-2009.

---