2002 INSC 0322
                                    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                                 Commissioner, Central Excise, Nagpur

                                                      Vs.

                               M/s. Waingange Sahkari S. Karkhana Ltd.

                                            C.A.No.496 of 1998

                             (N. Santosh Hegde and Shivaraj V. Patil JJ.)

                                                 18.04.2002

                                                   ORDER

N. Santosh Hegde, J.

1. The Tribunal was concerned with whether making trusses, columns and purlines amounted
to manufacture. The Tribunal followed an earlier decision in the case of Aruna Industries,
Vishakhapatnam v. C.C.E., Guntur1. It did not follow another decision in the case of
Structurails and Machineries (Bokaro) Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise2.

2. It is submitted on behalf of the Revenue that there are conflicting views taken by the
Tribunal and that such conflicting views have been taken even after the impugned order.

3. In one of these subsequent JUDGMENTs, in the case of Richardson & Cruddas (1972)
Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise3, the case of Aruna Industries (supra) has been considered
and found to be applicable to a situation where the assessee was erecting the structures at the
construction site and fabricating materials on the spot; it was therefore found that this could
not be consideration to be fabrication in a factory. Now, in the instant case, the Tribunal
noted that it had been found as a fact by the Collector that the assessee had undertaken
fabrication work at site. This was a case, therefore, to which the decision of Aruna Industries
(supra) applied and the Tribunal's order cannot be faulted.

4. The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.

11986(25) ELT 580
21984(17) ELT 127
31988 (38) ELT 176

1  SpotLaw