2025 (11) TMI 1438

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed by the Commissioner of Central Excise(Appeals-I), Bangalore. 2. The issue in the present appeal is whether the product manufactured by the Appellant is falling under the category of 'Ready Mix Concrete (RMC)', an excisable product falling under Central Excise Tariff Heading (CETH) 38245010 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 3. The brief facts are alleging that M/s. Ahluwalia Contracts India Limited the Appellant is manufacturing excisable product and supplying the same to M/s. Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., (BMRCL) for construction of workshop-cum-Depot at Peenya, and the has not registered with Central Excise Department and not paying appropriate central excise duty on the RMC manufactured at the batching plant, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....actor shall submit a proposal to the Engineer for removing all the plant structure/storage, etc., from the allocated site and hand over the same in a condition not inferior to what existed prior to the installation of the batching plant". There is no finding that the product manufactured by the Appellant is RMC and there is no finding that the machine is capable for manufacturing RMC. As per the impugned Order-in-Original, Adjudication authority reached the finding that "it is clear that the batching plants are installed in the project site for manufacturing Ready mix concrete for M/s ACIL, it appears that no central excise duty is discharged either by M/s. Ahlcon or M/s ACIL. It appears that the above said excisable goods chargeable to cen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he purchaser's vehicle in a plastic condition and requiring no further treatment before being placed in the position in which it is to stay and harden. Ready Mix Concrete attracts duty at the rate of 13% prior to 21.10.1997. Subsequent to 21.10.1997 vide Notification No. 65/97-C.E, dated 21-10-1997 the duty on Ready Mix Concrete classified under sub-heading 3824.20 has been reduced to 8%. ............................... 6. The matter has been examined, and concrete mix implies the conventional method of concrete production conforming to the ISI Standard 456-1978, which is produced and used at the site of construction. It is this concrete mixture, manufactured at the site of construction which is fully exempt vide Notif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at site by the appellant and hence, it cannot be RMC. Hence, the product is not classifiable as RMC at all and accordingly the appellant is not liable to pay excise duty. 7. The Learned Chartered Accountant (CA) further submits that the Adjudication authority and the Appellate authority have arrived at a conclusion that the goods manufactured by the Appellant is manufactured at site is RMC as per the statement recorded from the Finance Officer of M/s. Ahlcon Ready Mix Concrete Mix Pvt., Ltd. The statement of such a non-technical person like Finance executive cannot be relied on to reach a conclusion that the goods manufactured by the Appellant are RMC. The Learned Chartered Accountant (CA) also draws our attention to the report of the Ch....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....removal of excisable goods would not have come to the notice of the Department but for the verification of the Department, it is submitted that such contention is not sufficient to allege that the Appellant is guilty of suppression, fraud for evasion of payment of duty. In this regard, the Learned Chartered Accountant (CA) relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the matter of Landis Plus GYR Ltd Vs. CCE (2013 (290) E.L.T 447). 10. Learned Authorized Representative (AR) for the Revenue reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 11. Heard both sides and perused the records. 12. We find that as per the contract entered by the appellant, it is for supply of reinforced concrete having IS.456 standard and there is no evidence avail....