CARRIER AIRCON LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF C. EX.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Appeal filed by M/s. Carrier Aircon Ltd., the issue involved is whether Central Air Conditioning Plants erected by them in the premises of their customers are exigible to Central Excise duty.

(2.) Shri R. Krishnan, learned advocate, submitted that the Appellants erected and commissioned the huge Air conditioner system; that during the relevant period 1998 -99 to 2000 -2001, they entered into contracts with various customers for design, supply, erection, etc., and commissioning of chiller base Air conditioning system. The Commissioner under the impugned Order has confirmed the demand of duty and imposed the penalty holding that the Central Air Conditioning Plant is tailor made according to the specifications of the premises in which it is to be installed and it is capable of being transported, dismantled and sold. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that Central Air Conditioning Plant is used in large buildings, hospitals, hotels and commercial centers; that they have chiller installed in a remote area for e.g. basement or place close to the main building and with the help of ducting done throughout the building, provision for cooling area is made in every room, corridor and stairs as required; that the issue of non -excisability of the Central Air Conditioning Plant has been settled even by the Central Board of Excise and Customs under Order No. 58/1/2002, dated 15 -1 -2002 issued under Section 37B of the Central Excise Act; that it has been clarified by the Board in consultation with the Solicitor General of India that air conditioning plants are in the nature of systems and not machines as a whole; that they come into existence only by assembly and connections of various assemblies and parts and Air conditioning system as a whole plant cannot be considered to be excisable goods. Finally, the learned Advocate relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Blue Star Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur - 2002 (143) E.L.T. 391 (Tri).

(3.) Countering the arguments Shri Jagdish Singh, learned Departmental Representative, reiterated the findings as contained in the impugned Order and submitted that the Board's Order dated 15 -1 -2002 has been issued after the passing of impugned Order that this impugned Order was in conformity of the Circular which was in existence at the relevant time.