Writ Petition No. 800 of 1989. Case: Auto Measurematic Ltd. Vs Assistant Collector of C. Ex., Madras. Supreme Court
|Case Number:||Writ Petition No. 800 of 1989|
|Party Name:||Auto Measurematic Ltd. Vs Assistant Collector of C. Ex., Madras|
|Judges:||S.P. Bharucha and S.B. Majmudar, JJ.|
|Issue:||Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 2(d), 3 and 35F|
|Citation:||1997 (96) ELT 14 (SC)|
|Judgement Date:||February 19, 1997|
S.P. Bharucha, J.
The petitioners manufacture electronic truck weighing systems and their parts and similar equipment for the railways. They were informed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Madras, on 28-3-1989 that the value of bought out items would have to be included in the assessable value of weighbridges of the kind that were manufactured by them, in the light of the judgment of this Court in Narne Tulaman Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, 1988 (38) ELT 566. Upon the petitioners'' applying for elucidation, show cause notices were issued to them on 6-6-1989 and 14-6-1989 upon the same basis. The show cause notices are challenged in this writ petition.
By an interim order of 10-8-1989 the proceedings upon the show cause notices were allowed to go on, but on the condition that no recoveries would be made. We are informed that, pending the decision of the writ petition, the show cause notices have been confirmed.
The decision in the case of Narne Tulaman Manufacturers was considered by this Court in the case of Mittal Engineering Works (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut, 1996 (88) ELT 622, and it was explained that the only argument on behalf of Narne Tulaman Manufacturers had been that it was liable to excise duty in respect of the indicating system that it manufactured and not the whole weighbridge. The contention that weighbridges were not goods within the meaning of the statute was not raised and no evidence in that behalf...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL