1
D.B. Central Excise Appeal No.142/2009
Hindustan Zinc Ltd
vs
Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur-II & Anr.
DATE OF ORDER : 22.1.2010
HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA,J.
HON’BLE MR. DINESH MAHESHWARI,J.
Mr. Dinesh Mehta, for the appellant.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
The appellant is aggrieved against the order of the
Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New
Delhi dated 6.12.2007.
The only grievance of the appellant is with respect to
the finding of fact recorded by the authority below which
was upheld by the tribunal is with respect of the SI Poles.
The tribunal was of the view that SI Poles are not used for
the manufacturing of the goods. Learned counsel for the
appellant tried to submit that the SI Poles used by the
appellant are of special nature and quality and, therefore,
they are part and partial of process for manufacturing the
goods.
The nature and quality of the poles may be different
and may have been used suitably for the purpose, but so
far as its connection with the manufacture of the goods are
2
concerned, there is no evidence and material on the basis of
which it could have been held that the said SI Poles were, in
fact, used for manufacture of the goods so as to claim any
benefit. The question of fact has been decided by the
authorities after correct appreciation of the facts and we do
not find any infirmity in the said decision of the authority
below.
In view of the above, there is no merit in this appeal
and the same is hereby dismissed.
(DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. (PRAKASH TATIA),J.
cpgoyal/-