2005 (12) TMI 424

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sue involves in these appeals is in respect of the excisability on parts of structures. The issue is now settled by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. CCE, Aurangabad, Chandigarh, Kanpur & Chennai reported 2005 (190) E.L.T. 301 (Tri.-LB) in favour of the Revenue. The Larger Bench after deciding the issue of excisability on parts of steel structure ordered that appeals be placed before the Division Bench to decide the other issues involved in the appeals. 4. Appellants challenged the order on the ground that the Maharashtra State Electricity Board granted the contract to the appellants for construction/installation of coal handing plant. During the course of installation of coal handling plant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-Del.) 4.       Aldowin v. C.C.E., Chennai-II - 2003 (156) E.L.T. 254 (Tri.-Del.) 5. The contention of the appellant is that in the above decisions it was held that in case the raw materials and machines were supplied by the contractor for manufacture of goods to the sub-contractor in such a situation, the sub-contractor is the manufacturer of the goods. The contention of the appellant is that as the appellants are not the manufacturer of the goods in question, hence the demand of duty and imposition of penalty is not sustainable. 6. The appellants also made a alternative submission that whole demand is also time-bar as the demand for the period September, 1986 to December, 1988 and show caus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ractor at the rate prescribed under the contract and as per the terms of the payment, 80% payment is to be released against the monthly progressive for complete fabrication structure, 5% payment is to be released on completion of assembly, 5% payment is to be released for the structure of the full drive and remaining payment is to be made on the satisfactory completion of the work. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Baroda v. M.M. Khambhatwala (supra) held that the household ladies are the manufacturer of Agarwati though raw material was supplied by M/s. M.M. Khambhatwala and also paid wages on the basis of number of pieces manufactured by the ladies. The sale proceedings were to be sent to M/....