Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2012 (11) TMI 1014

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as amended. 3. The brief facts of the case are that M/s UP State Bridge Corporation (UPSBC), appellant who are engaged in the construction of bridges, have been awarded with a contract for construction of second Thane Creek Bridge by the Government of Maharashtra. The appellant M/s UPSBC constructed Bridge Builder Systems (herein after referred to as BBS). The appellant M/s UPSBC further placed the order on the other appellant i.e. M/s S.K. Trading Company for fabrication of six BBS. A show-cause notice was issued to the appellant demanding duty on the BBS by classifying the same under Chapter 84 of the Tariff. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand by classifying the same under sub-heading 84.80 of the Tariff. The appellant fil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... bridge area for assembly and erection would not fall under the ambit of notification no. 61/90. Therefore, no exemption will be available to BBS manufactured and cleared for Thane Creek Bridge." 4. The contention of the appellant is that the BBSs cannot be fabricated at site as the bridge is to be built on the creek and for the fabrication of eight BBSs, there was no place at creek, therefore, the same were fabricated at the nearby place as allotted by the State of Maharashtra. The appellants relied upon the Board's Circular No. 486/22/99-CX dated 18.5.1999 whereby the Board has clarified that the expression 'site' may not be given a restrictive meaning and shall include any premises made available to the manufacturer of goods falling u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(1) of Section 5A of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, herby exempts goods falling under Heading No. 73.08 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) fabricated at the site of work for use in construction work at such site from the whole of the duty of exercise leviable thereon which is specified in the said Schedule.    Provided that the said goods are manufactured out of iron or steel products on which the appropriate duty of exercise leviable thereon under the said schedule or the additional duty leviable thereon under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), as the case may be....