TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (5) TMI 796
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Central Excise, under the impugned Order or they were removing conveyor as such in different consignments for ease of transport, classifiable under Heading 84.28 of the Tariff and whether the extended period of limitation is invokable for demanding the duty of excise under Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act. 2.1 Shri M. Chandrasekharan, learned senior Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture conveyors and parts thereof; that the size of the conveyor manufactured by them varies from 8 Meters to 640 Meters in length and it is not possible to transport the same as a single unit under a single gate pass/invoice; that the conveyor is being supplied in piece meal in different lots/batches depending upon the length of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... apparatus are transported in an unassembled set. Although, in fact, the goods are then a collection of parts, they are classified as being a machine in question and not in any separate heading for parts." 2.2 The learned senior Advocate also relied upon the following decision : (i) Vinar System Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, 2001 (131) E.L.T. 578 (T) (ii) Vishwa Industrial Co. (P) Ltd. v. CCE, 1999 (107) E.L.T. 774 (T) (iii) CCE, Chennai v. Conveyor Equipments (P) Ltd., 2001 (127) E.L.T. 478 (T) 3. Shri M. Chandrasekharan, further, mentioned that the entire de­mand of duty which pertains to the period from 1995-1997 is time....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arts/components of the Conveyors; that it was specifically alleged in the show cause notice that they were clearing the parts of the conveyor declaring their product as "conveyor system"; that the facts brought on record do not clearly show that the conveyor system is first assembled by them in their own factory and then the same is despatched after disassembling it; that the Adjudicating Authority has given a specific findings in the impugned Order that conveyor could not come into existence from assembly of the parts cleared from their factory and that there was addition of some bought out items also and commissioning at buyer's premises. The learned S.D.R. emphasised that the conveyor system meant for General Motors India Ltd. would mean....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....chinery in unassembled or disassembled parts." She contended that the said deci­sion applied on all four to the present matter. 5. The learned S.D.R. finally submitted that the extended period of limitation is invokable as the Appellants never disclosed the fact that they were not clearing the complete conveyor system; that in their letter dated 17-3-1989, it was not disclosed by them that conveyor system was not assembled in their own factory; that what was mentioned therein was only that in case of long length system they were sending the system in 5-6 lots; that as such that letter does not help the Appellants. In reply the learned Senior Counsel mentioned that they were clearing the goods as per specific purchase Orders rece....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom 8 meters to 640 meters length for a single system. Where the systems are of small lengths we despatch the system in one lot under the Heading of conveyor system (84.28) charging the specified excise duty 5% + 0.25% (BED + SED). However, in case of long length system it is not possible for us to despatch in one lot hence despatches are made in 5 lots charging excise duty @ 10% + 0.5% (BED + SED) i.e. for conveyor systems parts (84.31) while the actual supply is for the system chargeable under Conveyor Systems (84.28) @ 5% + 0.25%. We request you to kindly accord us permission to charge uniform duty on conveyor system whether it is supplied in one lot or more than one lot." 7. It is thus apparent that the position was clearly m....