1984 (6) TMI 246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... as an appeal in terms of section 35P(2) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. 2. The appellants manufacture Hoists and Cranes. They also manufacture Micro Speed Attachments which are supplied to customers only when ordered. Micro speed attachment consists of an electric motor and a gear box. It is stated that these are not integral parts but are simply coupled together so that the electric motor can be used along with the hoist for which it is ordered. The fact that the motor and gear box are bolted, does not bring them under Item 30. On 29th September, 1977, the Superintendent of Central Excise issued a show cause under Rule 10A in respect of the period 18th March, 76 to 31st October, 77 for a short levy/non-levy of Rs. 15,936....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he subject motors are gear motors, he found no justification to interfere with the order appealed against. 3. In this appeal, it is urged that the contention that Rule 10 contains a lime limit of six months, whereas the notice received on 21st November, 1977 is for the period 18-3-1976 to 31-10-1977 part of which is beyond this and is time-barred has not been dealt with. They were also not given proper opportunity for personal hearing by the Collector and the order is bad in law. He has not appreciated that the motor is not fitted with micro speed attachment but it is a part of micro speed attachment. Further, an intermediate product cannot be held to be excisable goods vide Ever ready Flash Light Co. v. Union of India - Civil Misc.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....this cannot be applied retrospectively. In any case, no demand can be made for the period before 6-5-1977, as it is time barred. 5. Shri Lakshmikumaran supported the action of the lower authorities. According to section 2(f), 'manufacture' applied to the complete product. When the gear is fitted to the motor, a "Motor, all sorts" comes into existence in terms of Item 30. He relied on the cases of Hindustan Gen. Electric Corpn. v. Superintendent of Central Excise, Ranchi (AIR 1966 Patna 248) and Union of India v. Bombay Tyre Industry Ltd., wherein the intention in section 2(f) to remove any ambiguity as regards the precise stage when manufacture is completed, by including all processes incidental to completion of a manufactured produ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ses of assessment during the relevant time. The appellant could not then be blamed if the gear was not treated as part of the motor. The concerned classification Lists approving the classification of the products and the relevant RT 12's on which the assessment was initially done, are not before us. However, under Rule 173-1 it was incumbent on the officer approving the classification to make such enquiries as necessary before doing so. Periodic checks and inspection were also prescribed in the interest of revenue. Shri Gupta has produced the gate passes for motors but not for gears. These were cleared under separate gate passes, even though in fact they were coupled together and bolted and cleared together. At the same time, the show cause....