2000 (7) TMI 534

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ants on payment of duty in complete knocked down condition. 1.3 The appellant entered into a contract with M/s. South Eastern Oil Fields for supply of complete belt conveyor. In the said contract a sum of Rs. 73 lakhs was shown as design, manufacturing, supply, erection and commission charges of control protection system for conveyor system as per detailed specification of Hywood Control Systems. The department was of the view that the value of the said system is required to be included in the value of the conveyor belt manufactured by the appellant and accordingly issued show cause notice on 29-4-1991 by invoking the extended period of limitation. The said show cause notice culminated into the impugned order passed by the Collector....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder on the point of limitation. He submits that no suppression or mis-statement with an intent to evade payment of duty can be attributed to them. They had a bona fide belief that it is only the conveyor system manufactured by them which attracted duty and the control system which they had imported and supplied to their customers cannot be held to be a part of the conveyor system so as to include the value of the same in the assessable value of the conveyor. Reference was made to a number of decisions. 4. Shri Roy appearing for the Revenue argued that order was placed upon the appellant for the manufacture of conveyors as also for design, manufacture and supply, erection, commissioning and supervision of signalling communication. A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the same in the fans. Similarly in the case Atlad Copco Ltd. v. C.C.E., Pune [1998 (100) E.L.T. 103 (Tribunal) = 1998 (24) RLT 700 (CEGAT)], bought out control panels were held not to be component parts of compressors so as to include the cost of the same in the assessable value of the compressors. In the case of C.C.E., Pune v. Kishore Pumps Ltd. [1997 (91) E.L.T. 91 (Tribunal) = 1997 (18) RLT 115 (CEGAT)], relied upon by Shri Chattopadhyay the value of PD pump and agitators supplied with electric motor on customer's request was held to be separate item and the value was held as not includible in the value of electric motors inasmuch as the said item was not supplied compulsorily with other pump or agitator. Similarly it is seen in the i....