Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2014 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (11) TMI 698 - AT - CustomsDenial of refund claim - Benefit of exemption under notification No. 16/2000-Cus (Serial No. 182) - exemption denied on the ground that the catalyst imported by the assessee is a chemical used in the process of manufacture of fertilizers and cannot be considered as machinery, instrument, apparatus and appliances or parts or raw materials for the manufacture of the aforesaid items - Held that:- From a perusal of the notification it can be easily seen that what is exempted in the said notification are machinery, instruments, apparatus and appliances as well as parts or raw materials for the manufacture of the aforesaid items and parts required for renovation or modernization of the fertilizer plant. Further spare parts, raw materials or consumable stores essential for the maintenance of a fertilizer plant is also eligible for the exemption. The exemption is subject to the condition that an officer not below the rank of Deputy Secretary has to certify that the scheme for renovation/modernization has been granted techno-economic clearance by the Department of Fertilizers and recommends in each case the grant of exemption to aforesaid goods and the goods are required for the specified purpose. Goods on which the exemption is claimed is a catalyst, which is a chemical. The catalyst is required for initiating a chemical reaction. It is not required for manufacture of machinery, instruments, equipment or appliances. It is after the manufacture of machinery, instruments, or appliances, the catalyst is charged into machinery for initiating the chemical reaction and therefore, the argument that catalyst is a machinery, instrument or appliance or a raw materials or part for the manufacture of the aforesaid items does not stand to any logic. that catalyst does not answer to the description of the goods eligible for the exemption. Merely, because an officer from the Department of Fertilizers has certified, catalyst cannot be considered as machinery, instrument or appliances or a part thereof. Certification from the Ministry is required only for the limited purpose of essentiality of the goods for purposes specified. Therefore, the order of the appellate authority allowing the exemption is clearly unsustainable in law and merits to be set aside. Consequently, the appellant RCF also would not be eligible for the refund of any duty paid in pursuance to the said decision in the case of Mangalore Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner [1991 (8) TMI 83 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - Decided against assessee.
|