2002 (12) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise whereby the Central Excise duty of Rs. 43, 71,452/- was confirmed and penalty of Rs. 4, 50,000/- was imposed on the ground that appellants had carried out fabricatiod and assembling work of eight identifiable items namely seed cleaner, cracker; flaker toaster, extruder, elevators water treatment Plant and tanks. 2. Heard both sides. 3. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ineering Services v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur, reported in 2001 (133) E.L.T. 350 (Tri- Del.) 2. Dempo Engg. Services v. Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Goa, reported in 2001 (44) RLT 105 (CEGAT-Mum.) 3. SRF Limited v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras, reported in 2001 (136) E.L.T. 210 (Tri.) = 2001 (46) RLT 153 (CEGAT-Del.). 4. The contention of the appellant i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....who is the manufacturer, the contention of the Revenue is that the appellants arranged the labour and other utility iike electricity etc. for carrying out fabrication assembly at their sight. Therefore, the appellants are manufacturer of the goods in question. 7. We find that in this case that appellants took a specific stand before adjudicating authority that M/s. Oilex Engineers (I) Pvt. Ltd.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rer even if the raw material is supplied by the assessee. The Tribunal in the case of Dempo Engg. Services v. Collector of Central Excise & Customs, Goa, (Supra) taken the same view. The Tribunal held that in case the goods were fabricated by a sub-contractor, the sub-contractor is a manufacturer and liable to pay duty. The similar view was taken in the case of SRF Limited v. Collector of Central ....