SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

HARISH CHANDER, S.K.BHATNAGAR
Partap Steel Rolling Mills – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
V. Sridharan,K.D. Tayal

ORDER

S.K. Bhatnagar, Member (T)

1. Learned Counsel submits that the main issue involved herein is manufacture of various steel structures such as columns, beams, gantry, trusses, girders, purlins, section of windows (shutters) and fencing angles etc. The adjudicating authority has held that these goods fall under sub-heading 7308.90 whereas the contention of the applicant is that these are not goods because they come into existence only when they are incorporated into factory's structure. Iron and steel products are supplied by them to one M/s. Mechel Engineers Works, Indore for manufacture of said steel structures and for erection of the same in the vacant land i.e. the project area of the factory. They had also been supplying electrodes, gases for welding to the said engineering works free of cost who in turn fabricate the steel structures within the factory. It is also seen from the impugned order that as per the statement of Shri R.K. Patwa, Proprietor of M/s. Mechel Engineering Works, whole work of fabrication and erection was to be done as per the notice's instruction only and that he had employed 20 labourers for the said job and all the labourers were insured by the noticee.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top