Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 488 - AT - Central ExciseBenefit of Notification No.108/95 - Project funded by the World Bank and Asian Development Bank Steel bars Cleared were consumed in the Earthquake affected area of kuchh - Whether the appellant is eligible for the benefit of Notification No.108/95-CE on a certificate which has been issued in the name of the contractor who was executing the project Held that:- There was no material placed by the Revenue on the allegations of the possible misuse of the goods for unintended purposes by the Sub-Contractors - being the beneficial Notification issued in public interest and the project itself being executed fully by the Contractors as per the directions of the Project Implementing Authority, the fact that the machineries were not given directly to the project implementing authority but given to the agency executing the work in fact cannot go against the assessee's claim. As the machineries had been put in use by the sub-contractors, who were given the job of execution the claim for exemption cannot be denied - The use of the phrase 'supplied to the projects financed by the said United Nations or an International Organisation and approved by the Government of India' clearly shows that the condition for grant of exemption is supply of the goods towards the project and nothing beyond With all the conditions satisfied, the beneficial Notification applies there is no justification to introduce any condition or read in a restrictive manner Relying upon DEE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERS LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA [2010 (2) TMI 535 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT] and CCE, Pondichery Vs. Caterpillar India Pvt. Ltd. [2013 (7) TMI 244 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ]- the appellant is eligible for availing the benefit of Notification No.108/95-CE in respect of goods cleared by them for use in earthquake affected area Decided in favour of assessee.
|