ORDER
P.C. Jain, Vice President
1. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows :-
2. The appellants herein purchased M.S. Rolls and they are grooving within the factory and converted into grooved rolls for the purpose of Rolling Mills. Questions arisen are whether 1. the grooving undertaken by the appellants is the process of manufacture or not. 2. if it is considered to be a manufacture whether the benefit of Notification 281/86-C.E. would be available to the appellants or not. Ld. Advocate Shri R. Swaminathan submits that he does not press the first question. He submits that even if it is assumed that the manufacture of grooved rollers has been done by the appellant it is for the purpose of maintenance of the rolling mills in the factory. He is, therefore, entitled to the benefit of Notification 281/86-C.E. In respect of his proposition ld. Advocate relies on two judgments of the Tribunal namely 1. Bajrang Alloys Ltd. v. C.C.E., Raipur reported in 1994 (70) E.L.T. 624. 2. Parashuram Iran & Steel Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. v. C.C.E., Pune reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. 535 (Tribunal). Ld. Advocate, therefore, submits that there is no question of demand of duty for the period 1-4-1986 to 31-3-1991.
3. Opposing the contentions ld. JDR, Shri. S. Nunthuk submits that benefit of the Notification could not be available to the appellants because of the replacement of rollers in the rolling mill nor can it be repair of the rolling mill.
4. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced from the both sides. We are hot inclined to agree with the submission of the ld. JDR. Replacement with a grooved roller of a roller which has outlived its utility will be covered within the scope of the expression “maintenance and repair” of the rolling mills. We are, therefore, of the view that the appellant is clearly entitled to the benefit of the Notification 281/86-C.E. His case is further strengthened by the two judgments relied upon by him mentioned (supra). Consequently, we set aside the demand of duty and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the penalty as well. Appeal disposed of in the above manner with consequential relief to the appellant.