Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2004 (3) TMI 154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s well as Revenue are in appeals against the same Order-in-Original No. CE-29/99, dated 30-11-1999 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Guntur. Therefore, all the appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. Briefly stated, the background and facts leading to the passing of the adjudication order are this. M/s. KCP Limited, Macherla entered into a "Hydel Power D....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gineering Works. 3. M/s. KCP Ltd. has been resisting the demand on two grounds - (a) that items in question are merely fabricated elements of Hydel Project and that these are not excisable goods, and (b) that even if these items are liable to be held as excisable goods duty demand is liable to be raised against their fabricator (manufacturer) and not M/s. KCP Ltd. 4. The submission of M/s. KCP ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(75) E.L.T. 21 and the decision in the case of Mini Engineering Works - 1996 (86) E.L.T. 260 (sic). 6. The grievance of the Revenue is that the Commissioner should have imposed higher mandatory penalty. 7. We have perused the records and have considered the submissions made by both sides. The facts of the present case are almost identical to the case decided in Tungabhadra Steel Products case. T....