1997 (9) TMI 181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of `Tower Cranes', `EOT cranes' falling under sub-heading No. 8426.00 and parts thereof falling under sub-heading No. 8431.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. A show cause notice was issued to the appellants that during the period from 1-3-1986 to 30-1-1987, the appellants have cleared the parts of cranes from the factory on which they have paid duty at the lower rate by describing them as cranes. After adjudication, the impugned order was passed. 3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the cranes are bulky machines consisting of several assemblies which by themselves are not only heavy but also very huge. They were therefore, required to be ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Excise in the impugned order accepted the contention of the appellants that the cranes cannot be supplied in fully manufactured and assembled condition. He submits that the appellants accounted only the parts of cranes in their daily stock account register. He submits that in RG 1 register, the appellants are mentioning the goods in dispute as parts of cranes. He therefore prayed that the appeal be dismissed. 5. Heard both sides. In the present case, the contention of the appellants is that they have cleared the cranes in parts whereas in the impugned order, it was held that the appellants have cleared the parts of cranes. The appellants filed a detailed chart showing the names of buyers, the contract order placed by the buyers, de....