Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. A.C.C. Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs A.C.C. Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Feb 13, 2002

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/27564

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/27564
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: S Kang, a T V.K.
Decided On: Feb 13, 2002
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

A.C.C. Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In: (2002)(81)ECC365

Excerpt

1. the revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the commissioner (appeals), whereby the commissioner (appeals) held that conveyor system fabricated and erected at site for transporting various raw-materials are not goods chargeable to excise duty.2. when the case was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents, in spite of notice.4. the contention of the revenue is that conveyor system is assembly of large number of machines and other structures which can be dismantled and sold in parts.5. we find that the issue involved in this case is covered by the decision of the tribunal in respondents' own case, i.e., a.c.c. ltd (pinal order no. 47-48/2002-b dated 5.2.2002). the tribunal, after relying upon the decision of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of triveni engineering & industries ltd. v. c.c.e. 2000 (112) elt 273 (sc) held that marketability test requires that the goods as such should be in a position to be taken to the market and sold.6. in the present case, the contention of the revenue is that conveyor belt system can be sold after dismantling the same. therefore, in view of the above mentioned decision of the hon'ble supreme court and the earlier decision of the tribunal, in respondents' own case, we find no infirmity in the impugned order. the appeal, filed by the revenue, is rejected.

Full Judgment

1. The revenue filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) held that conveyor system fabricated and erected at site for transporting various raw-materials are not goods chargeable to excise duty.

2. When the case was called, none appeared on behalf of the respondents, in spite of notice.

4. The contention of the revenue is that conveyor system is assembly of large number of machines and other structures which can be dismantled and sold in parts.

5. We find that the issue involved in this case is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in respondents' own case, i.e., A.C.C. Ltd (Pinal Order No. 47-48/2002-B dated 5.2.2002). The Tribunal, after relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd. v. C.C.E. 2000 (112) ELT 273 (SC) held that marketability test requires that the goods as such should be in a position to be taken to the market and sold.6. In the present case, the contention of the revenue is that conveyor belt system can be sold after dismantling the same. Therefore, in view of the above mentioned decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the earlier decision of the Tribunal, in respondents' own case, we find no infirmity in the impugned order. The appeal, filed by the revenue, is rejected.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs A.C.C. Ltd. Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge S Kang, a T V.K.