2022 (9) TMI 165

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., classifiable under Chapter 84 of the Schedule 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 amo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed by the department were adjudicated by 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, Lear....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Bang.)] vi. CCE Vs. AlidharaTextool Engineers Pvt. Ltd. [2009(14) STR 305 (Tri. Ahmd.)] vii. NeoStructo Construction 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 appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../commissioning charges, the question of demanding service tax on ad hoc value of installation/commissioning charges was untenable in law. It 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 c....