MOHAN ENGINEERING WORKS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue involved in this appeal is regarding the availability of benefit of Notification No. 281 /86, dated 24 -4 -1986 in respect of the moulds and moulding equipments, manufactured and used captively by the appellants for the manufacture of their final products glass and glassware.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this issue may briefly be stated as under:

(3.) THE appellants are engaged in the manufacture of moulds and moulding equipments classifiable under Heading 84.80 of the CETA for supply to another factory M/s. Mohan Crystal and Glass Works, who are manufacturing glass and glasswares. They had been claiming exemption from payment of duty in respect of moulds and moulding equipments under Notification No. 281/86, dated 24 -4 -1986 but in fact, they were not entitled to the same. Accordingly, show cause notice dated 27 -4 -1993 was issued to them alleging that the moulds and moulding equipments manufactured by them were excisable goods and were also not meant for repair and maintenance of any machinery installed in their factory. It was also alleged in that notice that they willfully misstated and suppressed the true facts from the Revenue department and contravened the provisions of Rule 9(i) of the Central Excise Rules as they cleared the dutiable goods without payment of duty. They were called upon to pay the duty amount of Rs. 57,282/ - in respect of the goods cleared by them during the period April 1988 to 7 -2 -1990. Earlier to that another show cause notice dated 30 -1 -1990 on these very facts was also issued to them by the Additional Collector for recovery of the duty amount of Rs. 3,54,794.51 under proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises Act for the clearance of the goods without payment of duty during the period 1986 -87 to August 1989. The appellants, however, contested both those notices and maintained that they were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 281/86 as moulds and moulding equipments were covered by the same and were used by their sister concern for repair and maintenance of the glass manufacturing machinery. They denied of having misstated or suppressed the facts from the Revenue Department.