https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285872 Erection and installation of hydraulic mudguns and tap hole drilling machines at a steel plant were analysed under the test of permanency and movability. The majority view was that specialised machinery assembled for its own operational use does not become immovable property merely because it is fixed to the floor, if it remains capable of dismantling and reinstallation; on that basis, the equipment continued to be goods liable to central excise duty. On limitation, the majority held that incomplete and misleading declarations, coupled with non-disclosure to the proper site officers, amounted to suppression of material facts, so the extended period applied. A dissenting view treated the machinery as immovable property and the demand as time barred. en-us Mon, 18 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Jan 2020 12:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285872 Erection and installation of hydraulic mudguns and tap hole drilling machines at a steel plant were analysed under the test of permanency and movability. The majority view was that specialised machinery assembled for its own operational use does not become immovable property merely because it is fixed to the floor, if it remains capable of dismantling and reinstallation; on that basis, the equipment continued to be goods liable to central excise duty. On limitation, the majority held that incomplete and misleading declarations, coupled with non-disclosure to the proper site officers, amounted to suppression of material facts, so the extended period applied. A dissenting view treated the machinery as immovable property and the demand as time barred. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285872