2017 (2) TMI 1068

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mesh Nair The fact of the case is that the appellants have claimed exemption Notification No. 217/86 dated 1.3.1986 and 281/86 dated 24.4.1986 in respect of the products manufactured by them namely, measuring and checking instruments, appliances and machinery, checking templates, gauges falling under Chapter Heading 9031 or unloading machinery, lifting tackles, trolleys carriers, conveyors fallin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CO Ltd. 2000 (118) ELT 104 (Trio-LB), which was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. 2001 (128) ELT A67 (SC). 4. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides and perusal of the records, we find that on the identical issue, in the appellants own case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the exemption Notification No. 217/86 and 81/86. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... On the first point, the Tribunal on a concession made by the counsel for the parties, set aside the order passed by the Commissioner and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner for a fresh decision keeping in view the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Commissioner, Central Excise, Indore v. Surya Roshni Ltd. reported in 2001 (42) RLT 817. The finding recorded by the Tribunal on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....being carried out by the assessee in the workshop situated within the factory or that the goods were being used for repair or maintenance of the machinery installed therein. By cryptic and non-speaking order, the Tribunal has upheld the order passed by the Commissioner by applying the ratio of the decision of the Larger Bench in TISCO LTD. (supra) without recording a finding of fact that the produ....