1.2 Appeal No. E/1885/91-B1 and E/2691/91-B1 of Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd. The demand in these appeals relates to erection of coal handling plant.

3.5 Appeal No. E/1039 to 1041/90-B1. In these appeals of M/s R.K. Khade Patil and others duty demand is on construction of new factory building, general stores and sugar godowns.

6.7 Appeal Nos. E/138/90-B1 and E/2145/90-B1 of M/s Gannon Dunkerley and Co. Ltd. relate to duty demand on civil contracts for the construction of captive power plant at Bhatinda for the National Fertilisers Ltd. and construction work for Associated Bearing Co. Ltd.

8. Appeal No. E/62/92-B1 of M/s Man Structures Ltd. The duty demand is on preparation of parts of Electricity Towers and Latis Mast.

9.10. Appeal Nos. E/485/91-B1 and E/1923/91-B1. In these appeals of M/s Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. and Shri Kewal Singh, the demand of duty is on the setting up of factory shed.

11. E/4514/91-B1. This appeal of M/s Deccan Mechanical and Chemical Industries arises from duty demand on Trestles fabricated for evil construction.

13. Appeal No. E/1244/92-B1. In this appeal of M/s Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd. the demand is in respect of factory shed constructed at the appellants' premises by Civil Contractor.

14. Appeal No. E/722/91-B1. In this appeal of M/s Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd. the demand is with reference to structures made for construction of captive power plant at Bhatinda for National Fertilisers Ltd.

15. Appeal No. E/2095/91-B1. This appeal of M/s Bnal Industrial Corporation relates to demand in respect of steel structures such as Columns, Purlins and Trusses fabricated in the course of erection of sheds.

16. Appeal No. E/2176/92-B1 of M/s Amar Singh & Co. The demand in this appeal relates to fabrication of steel structures like columns, purlins and trusses, etc.

17. Appeal No. E/4309/91-B1. The issue involved in this appeal is the dutiability on (i) Sulphur Furnace (ii) Carbon-di-sulphide Plant (iii) Double Catalyst Double Absorption Plant and Conveyor System manufactured/fabricated for the capacity expansion of the appellants' factory.

2. The appellants have explained that the work involved in these cases is civil constructions (which are immovable property) or the processing of iron and steel, steel structural items like plates and angles for use within immovable structures. The structural items perform architectural functions of beams, girders, trusses, etc. in the manufacture of factory building, power plant, etc. The processes carried out are basically cleaning, cutting to sizes, trimming, drilling holes, welding, bolting, etc. so that these structural items are made to the specifications indicated in the architectural drawings.

3. The appellants have resisted the levy of duty on plant and buildings on the ground that these are immovable properties and are not 'goods' to attract Central Excise Duty. With regard to structural items, they have submitted that no manufacturing of new goods takes place; instead they are only carrying out certain processes to make them ready for use in construction. They received structural items of iron and carried out the aforesaid processes so that they are ready for use/fitment in buildings and other structures. Structural iron or steel like plates and angles have already paid duty and the processes did not transform them into any new goods. The appellants have also submitted that these have no identity as columns, beams, girders, trusses, grills, block, hollows, etc. and are not bought and sold in the market by these names. They assume these identities only on their being placed in the building to perform architectural functions of beams, girders, purlins, etc. And once they are placed in the building and structures, they have become part of such buildings and structures whi