PRANAV VIKAS INDIAN LTD. AND ANR. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these two appeals, arising out of Order -in -Appeal Nos. 426&429/2002 both dated 23.7.2002 passed by the Commissioner of Appeals, the common issue involved is whether Special Excise duty as specified under 2nd Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act is leviable on cooling coil assembly, condenser unit assembly manufactured by them.

(2.) We heard Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, learned Advocate for the Appellants, and Shri Vikas Kumar, learned Senior Departmental Representative for the Revenue. Learned Advocate submitted that the issue involved in both these appeals stands decided by the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Kehin Penalfa v. Commissioner of Central Excise, NOIDA vide Final Order No. 498/200243 dated 11.12.2002. The learned Senior Departmental Representative fairly agrees with the submissions made by the learned Advocate.

(3.) AS submitted by the learned Advocate, we find that the issue involved in both these appeals is no more res integra as the Tribunal has held in the case of Kehin Penalfa that air conditioner sub assembly frame and Air conditioner sub assembly engine would be classifiable as parts eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 6/2000 (S. No. 212 -A) following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Seagull Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai and the Board's Circular No. 666/57/2002 CX dated 25.9.2002. The Appellants have submitted that the products in question did not have all the parts of Air conditioner as stipulated in the Board's Circular. Thus, following the ratio of the said decision, we set aside the impugned orders and allow both the appeals.