2001 (4) TMI 343

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....furnaces are purchased by the appellants from the market. These are taken to the customers' premises and erected/installed there. Show cause notice dated 1-2-1994 was issued alleging that such furnaces attracted duty under chapter heading 84.17, that the noticees had cleared such furnaces without payment of duty quantified at Rs. 41,36,306/-. Another show cause notice dated 4-2-1992 issued on the same lines demanded duty of Rs. 32,62,110/-. The total period covered under these two show cause notices was January 1987 to January 1993. The assessees were heard by the Commissioner. The claim advanced was that the furnaces were attached to earth and were not "goods" on which excise duty could be levied. A circular of the department was cited as ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hed to the earth by a foundation, it was not capable of being sold. It was held that the creation at site did not become goods. The Court distinguished the judgments in the case of Narne Tulaman Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 1988 (38) E.L.T. 566 and in the case of Hyderabad Race Club v. C.C.E. - 1986 (23) E.L.T. 274. In the case of Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v. C.C.E. - 1998 (97) E.L.T. 3 the Supreme Court held that a very huge machine fixed to the earth did not become immovable. It was observed that merely because something is affixed to the earth it did not become immovable property. A machine which is fixed to the earth for better functioning continues to be movable property and excisable goods. 4. The next landmark judgment is ....