JUDGMENT
S.S. Sekhon, J.
1. This appeal and the stay petition therein is for confirmation of demand demand of duty on the contractor of Visakhapatnam Port Trust, who got the crane assembled and erected fol Visakhapatnam Port Trust, at site, through one M/s Aditya Engineering Services. The demand of duties have been confirmed on the contractor of Visakhapatnam Port Trust as the Commissioner came to the conclusion that this contractor was the manufacturer of the crane which was excisable item because of the close supervision other clauses as observed by him in the contract.
2. We have heard both sides and considered the matter. Adjudiction order impugned before us is pursuent to the direction of this Tribunal in remand to determine the question as to who was the manufacturer in the facts and circumstances of this case and also whether the goods would be excisable goods. Prima facie the matter appears to be covered in favour of the appellants in terms of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Pawan Biscuits and Tribeni Engineering (120) ELT 273 (T). During the course of hearing it was submitted across the bar that an amount of Rs.40.80 lac was deposited under provisions of Section 35F in the remand proceedings before the Tribunal and this amount is still lying with the Department. In this view of the matter we would consider this deposit to be sufficient under the provisions of Section 35F and we will not order them to make any further amount of deposit.
3. Matter is posted for hearing on 5th November, 2001.
4. (Dictated & pronounced in Court)