GENERAL FABRICATORS AND GENERAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two appeals filed by m/s. General Fabricators and General Crafters, with reference to impugned order dated 16.2.96, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum.

(2.) SH . Sampath, Ld. Counsel, appearing for the appellants submitted that duty amounting to Rs. 7,76,687/ - has been demanded from M/s. General Fabricators and penalty imposed on other appellant under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules. he submitted that the Commissioner in the impugned order framed the following issues in raising the demand of the duty:

(3.) SH . Thomas appearing for the revenue, submitted that the issue with reference to who is the manufacture has also been considered by the Commissioner as can be seen from para -10.5 of the impugned order. The relevant para is as under: "10.5 The next issue which is, who is the manufacturer of the subject goods. The defence has contended that the activity undertaken by their parties does not qualify to be defined as manufacture under Section 2(f) of Central Excise & Salt Act, 1944. The main thrust of the argument is based on the Case Laws and outcome of the cross examination. The defence has made an attempt to point the needle towards the subject customers for identifying the manufacturer in the case. The main force in the argument is that the raw -material is being supplied by the customs and the goods comes into emergence at the customer premises; that the parties to the case only arrange for labour at the instance of the customer."