TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 426
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lois Gutenberg Machines Pvt. Ltd. as the appellant challenging the orders of the original authority on the first two occasions. In the third round, it is Revenue that is appellant. 2. Revenue is aggrieved by order-in-original No. 45/KKS/2005-2006, dated 31st January, 2006 of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III, which dropped the proceedings initiated against the respondent for recovery of duty of ` 18,80,344.20 on supplies made to customers and a further amount of ` 7,48,000/- being the duty on machines seized from the premises of the respondent on 20th June, 1991. M/s. Alois Gutenberg Machines Pvt. Ltd. claims to be a trader which is specialised in procuring various machines required for setting up facilities to prod....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Union of India [1992 (58) E.L.T. 48 (Bom.)], Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. [1988 (33) E.L.T. 297 (Pat.), Commissioner v. Poonam Spark P. Ltd. [2015 (318) E.L.T. A261 (Del.)], Poonam Spark P. Ltd. v. Commissioner [2004 (164) E.L.T. 282 (Tri.-Kolkata)], TRF Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [2002 (150) E.L.T. 283 (Tri.-Kolkata)], Majestic Auto Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [2001 (130) E.L.T. 551 (Tri.-Del.)], Vishwa Industrial Co. (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise [1999 (107) E.L.T. 774 (Tribunal)], Escorts Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1998 (103) E.L.T. 89 (Tribunal)], Pressure Cookers and Appliances Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1987 (28) E.L.T. 566 (Tribunal)], Name Tulaman Manuf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gether to a clearly defined function covered by one of the headings in Chapter 84 or Chapter 85, then the whole falls to be classified in the heading appropriate to that function." 8. We cannot but recall the foundation for levying duties of Central Excise to hold that the excisability can be attributed to a note in the schedule only when it is expressly deemed as such. The section note that has been cited relates to the manner of classifying goods of specific chapter when considered as an aggregate of manufacture. We note from the records that each of the components of the assembly are independent stand-alone equipment with each subject to excise duty upon clearance from the respective factories of production. 9. The assembly o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be. I further move to examine the excisability of the computer form printing machines supplied by M/s. AGMPL under chapter heading 84.43 of CETA, 1985. For reference to the Note 4 to Section XVI of CETA 1985 is reproduced below "Where a machine (including a combination of machine) consists of individual components (whether separate or interconnected by piping, by transmission devices, by electric cables or by other devices) intended to contribute together to a clearly defined function covered by one of the headings in Chapter 84 or Chapter 85, then the whole falls to be classified in the heading appropriate to that function." From the perusal of the above Section Note, it appears that in order to fit into the provisions of this Section No....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rring to its earlier Section 37B Order No. 53/2/98-CX, dated 2-4-98 and various Supreme Court judgments mentioned below : (i) Quality Steel Tubes P. Ltd. v. CCE [1995 (75) E.L.T. 17 (S.C.)] (ii) Mittal Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut [1996 (88) E.L.T. 622 (S.C.)] (iii) Sirput Paper Mills Ltd. v. CCE [1998 (97) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] (iv) Silica Metallurgical Ltd. v. CCE, Cochin [1999 (106) E.L.T. 439 (T)] as confirmed by Supreme Court vide their order dated 22-2-99 [1999 (108) E.L.T. A58 (S.C.)] (v) Duncan Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai [2000 (88) ECR 19 (SC)] (vi) Triveni Engineering & Inds. L....