http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  3973 of 2001

PETITIONER: M/s Tata Iron & Steal Co. Ltd.

RESPONDENT: Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna    

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/05/2004

BENCH: CJI & G.P. MATHUR.

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

RAJENDRA BABU, CJI

       The question raised in this appeal is whether  Electric Overhead Traveling (EOT) Cranes are liable to  excise duty or not.  In the order under appeal, the  Tribunal proceeded on the basis that the Revenue’s  contention that the activity of the appellant in the  manufacture and clearance of the complete crane in  semi-knocked down condition or is manufacture of  crane parts had already been decided by the Patna  High Court in the appellant’s case having notified that  the decision of the Patna High Court is still a good law  not having been interfered by this Court till date.  And  therefore held that the goods in question to the  complete cranes falling under Heading 81.26.   However, on the question of limitation, the Tribunal  held in favour of the appellant.  On 9th February, 2000,  this Court in Civil Appeal Nos.141466 of 1998 and 102  of 1999 allowed the appeals of Appellants against the  decision of the Patna High Court, set aside the orders  of the respondents as well as of the High Court and  held that no excise duty is payable on the E.O.T. cranes  as assembled.  In the result, we set aside this part of  the order made by the Tribunal and remit the matter to  it for fresh examination in the light of the order of this  Court.

       Insofar as the question of limitation and other  aspects are concerned, we do not interfere with the  order made by the Tribunal.  Only to the extent  indicated above, the order of the Tribunal is set aside.

       Appeal allowed accordingly.