Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 3973 of 2001
PETITIONER:
M/s Tata Iron & Steal Co. Ltd.
RESPONDENT:
Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/05/2004
BENCH:
CJI & G.P. MATHUR.
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
RAJENDRA BABU, CJI
The question raised in this appeal is whether
Electric Overhead Traveling (EOT) Cranes are liable to
excise duty or not. In the order under appeal, the
Tribunal proceeded on the basis that the Revenue’s
contention that the activity of the appellant in the
manufacture and clearance of the complete crane in
semi-knocked down condition or is manufacture of
crane parts had already been decided by the Patna
High Court in the appellant’s case having notified that
the decision of the Patna High Court is still a good law
not having been interfered by this Court till date. And
therefore held that the goods in question to the
complete cranes falling under Heading 81.26.
However, on the question of limitation, the Tribunal
held in favour of the appellant. On 9th February, 2000,
this Court in Civil Appeal Nos.141466 of 1998 and 102
of 1999 allowed the appeals of Appellants against the
decision of the Patna High Court, set aside the orders
of the respondents as well as of the High Court and
held that no excise duty is payable on the E.O.T. cranes
as assembled. In the result, we set aside this part of
the order made by the Tribunal and remit the matter to
it for fresh examination in the light of the order of this
Court.
Insofar as the question of limitation and other
aspects are concerned, we do not interfere with the
order made by the Tribunal. Only to the extent
indicated above, the order of the Tribunal is set aside.
Appeal allowed accordingly.