https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117624 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding excisability on parts of structures and liability for duty on fabricated steel structures. It found the sub-contractor, not the appellant, to be the actual manufacturer based on contract terms. The demand was deemed time-barred, as the sub-contractor bore responsibility for fabrication and quality control. The Tribunal set aside the finding that the sub-contractor was a hired laborer, allowing the appeals and declaring the demand and penalties unsustainable. en-us Mon, 26 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:12:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117624 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding excisability on parts of structures and liability for duty on fabricated steel structures. It found the sub-contractor, not the appellant, to be the actual manufacturer based on contract terms. The demand was deemed time-barred, as the sub-contractor bore responsibility for fabrication and quality control. The Tribunal set aside the finding that the sub-contractor was a hired laborer, allowing the appeals and declaring the demand and penalties unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 26 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117624