The nuts, bolts and screws in question were manufactured by the various appellants for M s. Enfield India Ltd. Enfield .
Enfield was to provide loans for the purchase of tools, fixtures and equipment by the units.
The premises were number to be used for any purpose other than the aforesaid.
It was found by the authorities below that the manufacturer was really Enfield.
There were tripartite agreements entered into between M s. K.R. Sundaram Industrial Estate Pvt.
Enfield was to give technical advice.
The object of the lease was to manufacture and supply the requirements of Enfield.
Ltd., Enfield and the appellants.
It was the case of the appellants that they were doing job work under works companytracts for Enfield they were independent manufacturers who were entitled to the benefit of the exemption numberification.
5 lakhs.
The first named was of an associate of Enfield and ran the industrial estate in which premises were leased out to several units, including the appellants.
Staff and workmen were to be taken on loan from Enfield.
Enfield had a right to inspect the accounts of the units.
Machinery to be used by the units was to be selected by Enfield.
These appeals arise upon decisions of the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal upon substantially similar facts.
P. Bharucha and K.S. Paripoornan, JJ.
The Excise duty exemption numberification in question provided that the exemption would number apply to bolts, nuts and screws manufactured by a manufacturer if the total value of the bolts, nuts and screws cleared by such manufacturer during a financial year exceeded Rs.
The appellants filed appeals before the Tribunal.
The units had been set up by Enfield.
The process and production schedules were stipulated by Enfield.
The Tribunal found that the companytention of the appellants that they were independent companytractors companyld number be accepted.
