TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 165
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....chedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The final product manufactured by the appellant is liable for payment of Central Excise duty and the appellant got itself registered with the jurisdictional Central Excise authorities as a "manufacturer" and also discharged the Central Excise duty liability. In addition, the appellant is also registered as person liable for payment of service tax. The final products manufactured and sold by the appellant is in the nature of "plug and play" machines such as television or washing machine etc. The appellant sells final product based on the purchase orders placed on them by the customers. Sometimes, while placing purchase orders the customers pay advance amount and the balance is payable after ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the department, wherein the following demands were confirmed on the appellant: Appeal No. OIO dated Period involved Service Tax demanded Penalty ST/1172/2010 11/03/2010 August 2003 to September 2005 Rs.1,07,69,813/- u/s 76 (not quantified) Rs.1000/- u/s 77 Rs.1,07,69,813/- u/s 78 ST/2187/2012 27/04/2012 October 2005 to February 2011 Rs.18,64,23,080/- U/s 76 (not quantified) Rs.5000/- u/s 77 Rs.18,64,23,080/- u/s 78 1.1. Feeling aggrieved, with the impugned orders dated 11.03.2010 and 27.04.2012 passed by the learned Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore, the appellant has filed these appeals before the Tribunal. 2. Shri N. Anand, Learned Advocate, appearing for the appellant submitted that the appellant has not per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction Ltd. Vs. CCE [2010(19) STR 361 (Tri. Ahmd.)]. 3. On the other hand, Ms. C.V. Savitha, Learned Authorised Representative, appearing for the Revenue, reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order in support of confirmation of the adjudged demands on the appellant. 4. Heard both sides and examined the case records. 5. On perusal of the case records, we find that the appellant had not separately charged, billed or received any amount from the customers towards installation charges for installing the weighing machine at the customer site. Since on the entire value of excisable goods, the appellant had discharged the Central Excise duty liability in terms of Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and had not claimed any deduc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was also held that the assessee was a manufacturer of excisable goods and was not an agency engaged in providing service of installation/commissioning. Further in the case of Allengers Medical Systems Ltd.(supra), it has been held by the Tribunal that where the assesse is paying Central Excise duty on manufacture and sale of goods on the total value recovered by them from customers, simply providing the service of erection/commissioning, which is a part of excisable goods, cannot be termed as provision of service and accordingly, levy of service on such activities cannot be sustained. In an identical case, in the matter of AlidharaTextool Engineers Pvt Ltd. (supra), it has also been held by the Tribunal that the process of erection and co....