M/S. T.T.G. INDUSTRIES LTD., MADRAS versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR

Citation: [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 659 · Decided: 07-05-2004 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: RUMA PAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

MIS. T.T.G. INDUSTRIES LTD., MADRAS 
A 
v. 
COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, RAIPUR 
MAY 7, 2004 
B 
[RUMA PAL AND B.P. SINGH, JJ.] 
Central Excise Act, 1944 : 
Sections 2(d) and 3-Erection and installation of Mudguns and 
Drilling Machines by assessee at the site of the Steel Plant-Several C 
components imported and also manufactured by assessee in factory and 
thereafter transported at the site for manufacturing and commissioning of 
machines-Process, nature of-If erection of 'immovable property' or 
emergence of 'good '-Excise duty-Levy of-Held: Mudguns and Drilling 
Machines were erected at the site on specially made concrete platform at D 
a level of 25 feet above the ground on a base plate secured to concrete 
platform-It cannot be shifted without first dismantling it and then re-
erecting it at another site-Hence, taking into account the volume and 
weight of the machine, the process undertaken and erection done, machines 
cannot be described as 'excisable goods' within the meaning of the Act but E 
'immovable property '-As such assessee not liable to pay excise duty on 
manufacture and removal of Mudgun and Drilling Machines and also not 
liable to pay penalty imposed-Central Excise Tariff Act, 1944-Heading 
84.59 and 84.24-Transfer of Property Act, 1882-Section 3-General 
Clauses Act, 1897-Section 3(25). 
F 
Section I IA-Extended period of limitation-Invocation of-Assessee 
manufacturing and erecting Hydraulic Mudguns and Tap Hole Drilling 
Machines at the site of the Steel Plant out of imported components and also 
components manufactured in assessee 's factory-Steel Plant under 
jurisdiction of one Collectorate and factory under the jurisdiction of other G 
Collectorate-Assessee paying duty with regard to components 
manufactured at his factory and seeking classification of Drilling Machines 
under heading 84.59 and Mudguns under heading 84.24-However, non-
ihtimation of manufacturing and erecting activities at the site to Collectorate 
having jurisdiction over Steel Plant and also did not file necessmy H 
659 
660 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2004] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A classification list nor complied with necessary excise formalities-Held: 
On account of suppression of facts from the authorities, extended period 
of limitation attracted and demand of duty not barred by limitation-'-
Central Excise Tariff Act, 1944-Heading 84.59 and 84.24. 
B 
The appell~nt company-assessee entered into an agreement with 
the Steel Plant for design, supply, supervision of erection and 
commissioning of sets of Hydraulic Mudguns and Tap Hole Drilling 
Machines required for blast furnace of the Steel Plant. The appellant 
imported several components of the machines and also manufactured 
C some of the components of the machines at their factory. Thereafter, 
these components were transported to the site of the Steel Plant where 
the manufacturing and commissioning of the machines took place. The 
appellant paid excise duty in respect of the components manufactured 
at its factory. It also filed classification list seeking classification of 
Hydraulic Drilling Machines under heading 84.59 and Mudguns under 
D heading 84.24 of the Central Exicise Tariff Act, before the Central 
Excise Authority having jurisdiction over their factory. However, the 
appellant did not pay excise duty on manufacture of Mudguns and 
Drilling Machines which were erected and commissioned at site and 
also did not inform the Collector having jurisdiction over the Steel 
E Plant with regard to the assembly and manufacture of machines at the 
site and also did not file the classification list nor complied with the 
Central formalities under the Rules. The Department issued notice to 
the appellant demanding Central and Special Excise Duty on the 
machineries erected by him and also imposed penalty. The Collector 
F upheld the demand of duty on Hydraulic Mudguns and Tap Hole 
Drilling Machines and imposed penalty for suppression of the fact of 
such manufacture and removal of excisable goods from the Department 
without payment of duty. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by 
the appellant. Hence the present appeal. 
G 
The appellant-assessee contended that the erection of Mudguns 
and Drilling Machines at the site of the Steel Plant results in erection 
of immovable property and not goods and as such excise duty is not 
leviable; that it cannot be moved from the place where it is erected as 
it is and if it becomes necessary to move it, it has first to be dism

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.