Prima facie putting electrolytes and charging battery of two-wheeler does not amount to manufacture of TWO-WHEELERS
WHEN we reported the case in , we received many calls asking what the case was all about. We had a hard time explaining that the case was what was mentioned in the caption and nothing more. Then we had a call asking whether we had a copy of the Order-in-original or for that matter the SCN. We expressed inability on both counts but curiosity lead us to asking the caller as to what purpose would the SCN/O-in-O serve.
The sonorous voice on the other end answered - I am in the Headquarters (Preventive) and would like to book a similar case against such "dealers" in my jurisdiction!
Let aside that we wouldn't have shared even if we had it!
Be that as it may, one more similar case came to our notice and this too owes its origin to the fluidic pen of the CCE, Nagpur. It seems he started the New Year 2013 by confirming a demand alleging the same deemed ‘manufacture' concept and he started with a BANG - the demand confirmed is of Rs.2.15 Crores, interest and penalty.
And when the application filed by the dealer was heard, the same Division Bench had no hesitation in allowing the Stay petition by taking the prima facie view that ‘charging the battery by putting electrolyte cannot be considered as manufacture of motorcycle'.