Full Judgment
2. The appellants manufactured boilers, availing of the benefit of notification 205/88-CE dated 25.5.1988 as amended. Entries at sr. nos.
15 & 18 in the table to the notification read as under:- "15: Agricultural and Municipal waste conversion devices producing energy.
18: Parts consumed within the factory of production of such parts for the manufacture of goods specified at sr. nos. 1 to 17 above." 3. The show cause notices covering the periods October, 1995 to August, 1997 and December, 1998 to March, 1999 alleged that the appellants were manufacturing conveyors and control panels which were not covered under the benefit of this notification. It was alleged that the assessee had consumed them without payment of duty in the manufacture of exempted products and in doing so they had not followed the required procedures such as filing of classification list etc. In two orders-in-original the duties were confirmed and penalties were imposed. In one proceedings (Appeal No. E/74-R/2000-Mum) the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on account of failure of the assessee to follow the directions in the stay application. In the other order (Appeal No.E/20900/2000-Mum) he upheld the lower orders. He held that conveyors and control panels were separate excisable products having separate tariff entries and could not be treated as parts of the boilers. Hence the present appeals.
4. We have heard Shri J.C. Patel, advocate for the appellants and Shri J.M. George, JDR for the Revenue.
5. A boiler would be made of a number of component parts. It would require steel sheets, screws, bolts, nuts, rivets, hoops, and a number of other products even for the basic shell construction. It would also require pipes, joints, bends etc. When it is put to shape it would need conveyors to feed it and panels to control it. All these parts would doubtlessly fall under a number of headings. The entry at sr. no. 18 in the notification is deliberately generally worded so as to enable anything used in the construction of the boilers to be covered thereunder. The original and the appellate authorities clearly made an error in interpreting the entry in the notification in a narrow and restrictive manner. The entry as it is worded will embrace every single thing used in the construction of the boiler, irrespective of its classification.
6. The impugned orders therefore do not sustain. The appeals are allowed with consequential relief.