Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2011 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (6) TMI 642 - CESTAT, NEW DELHIWhether restriction regarding the requirement of minimum 20 cm. diameter contemplated under sub-clause (3) of Clause 7 in the table of the Notification No. 6/2006-C.E., dated 1-3-2006 as amended by the Notification Nos. 25/2006-C.E. dated 20-3-2006, applies to the pipes specified under sub-clause (2) of Clause 7 of the said table of the said notification also - Commissioner rejected the contention of the appellants that all the three sub-clauses of Clause 7 are to be read independently and thereby confirmed the demand pertains to the present appeal – Held that:- pipes required for delivery of water from its source to the plant and/or from the plant to the first storage point are necessarily to be bigger in diameter then the diameter of the pipes for further delivery of the water. Indeed it appears to us that there could not be any such case because the size of the pipes carrying the water beyond the storage point would essentially depend upon the requirement of supply of water. Being so, the interpretation which the learned Commissioner has sought to give to sub-clause (2) does not appear to be correct. The condition in sub-clause (3) cannot be read sub-clause (2) of Clause 7 of the Table, appeal allowed
|