2016 (1) TMI 762

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... against the respondent to demand Central Excise duty in respect of iron and steel structures like trusses, columns, staircase, windows and section etc. The case was decided by the original authority who confirmed the demand and imposed equal amount of penalty. On appeal, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order and allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the said order, Revenue is in appeal before us. 2. In the grounds of appeal, Revenue contended that the respondents were engaged in the manufacture of steel structures and parts thereof falling under CETH 7308.90 using the labour contractors. These steel structures are commonly known as component parts of building/ shed. The finished product is made from duty paid raw material an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er (Appeals). He drew our attention to the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd. [2005 (190) ELT 195 (Tri-Del)] which was upheld by the Honble Supreme Court [2012 (277) ELT A 84 (SC]). He also contended that actual activity was carried out by the contractor at site. Even if excise duty is to be recovered, considering the activity as manufacture, the contractors who were doing the said work at site are only liable. In this regard, he relied on this Tribunal decision in Diamond Cements Ltd. [2012 (283) ELT 226 (Tri-Del)]. He said the facts of their case is similar to the one decided by the Tribunal. 5. We have heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. First, we consider the question of excise dut....