Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Laxmi Foundry

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Laxmi Foundry

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Aug 28, 2001

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/25257

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/25257
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Aug 28, 2001
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Laxmi Foundry

Excerpt

1. in the order impugned in the appeal, the commissioner (appeals) has concluded that the treated sand, made by the respondent for making sand mould has only a short shelf life of two hours and therefore not marketable and therefore, not excisable goods. this finding is challenged in this appeal.2. the appeal contends that by applying the ratio of the decision of the tribunal in telco v. cce 1990 (50) elt 644 it need not be shown that the product is actually marketed. its marketability is sufficient.3. it is not necessary for us to examine whether the process is one of manufacture or not, or to consider the marketability of the goods. this is because assuming the goods to be excisable, the benefit of notification 217/86 will be available. the goods satisfy the condition in the notification that they are used in or in relation to the manufacture of excisable goods ie.e. steel castings, in the same factory. the benefit of the notification has been extended in various decisions, of which we need to cite only cce v. ksp pumps 2000 (115) elt 156 . this decision has referred to the other decisions in which this view has been accepted. we therefore find no ground for interference.

Full Judgment

1. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has concluded that the treated sand, made by the respondent for making sand mould has only a short shelf life of two hours and therefore not marketable and therefore, not excisable goods. This finding is challenged in this appeal.

2. The appeal contends that by applying the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal in Telco v. CCE 1990 (50) ELT 644 it need not be shown that the product is actually marketed. Its marketability is sufficient.

3. It is not necessary for us to examine whether the process is one of manufacture or not, or to consider the marketability of the goods. This is because assuming the goods to be excisable, the benefit of notification 217/86 will be available. The goods satisfy the condition in the notification that they are used in or in relation to the manufacture of excisable goods ie.e. steel castings, in the same factory. The benefit of the notification has been extended in various decisions, of which we need to cite only CCE v. KSP Pumps 2000 (115) ELT 156 . This decision has referred to the other decisions in which this view has been accepted. We therefore find no ground for interference.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Laxmi Foundry Same Subject Service Tax