Maintenance and repair exemption for rolling mill grooving and roller replacement was held applicable, defeating duty demand and penalty.

Grooving of rolling mills was treated as incidental to their upkeep, and replacement of a roller that had outlived its utility was regarded as part of the maintenance and repair of the rolling mills. On that basis, Notification No. 281/86-C.E. was held applicable to the activity, so the duty demand could not survive and the penalty was not justified. The appellant was therefore entitled to the exemption claimed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 281/86-C.E. in respect of grooving and replacement of rollers used for the rolling mills, and whether the demand of duty and penalty were sustainable.

Analysis: The grooving activity was treated as incidental to the upkeep of the rolling mills, and replacement of a roller that had outlived its utility was held to fall within the expression "maintenance and repair" of the rolling mills. On that basis, the exemption under Notification No. 281/86-C.E. was found applicable. Once the activity was covered by the notification, the duty demand could not survive, and the penalty also ceased to be justified.

Conclusion: The appellant was held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 281/86-C.E., and the duty demand and penalty were set aside.

---