TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 464X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he notification No.3/2001-CE & No.6/2002-CE provides exemption from payment of Central Excise duty in respect of wind operated electricity generators and its components and parts thereof – The ratio of Nicco Corporation Ltd not applicable in the facts of instant case - Benefit of notification No. 6/2002-CE is allowed to the tower of wind operated electricity generators – Decided in favor of Assessee. - E/1318/07 - A/269/2013/EB/C-II - Dated:- 13-2-2013 - S S Kang And P R Chandrasekharan, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Gajendra Jain, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri K L Goyal, Comm. (AR) Per: S S Kang: 1. Heard both the sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against impugned order dated 09/07/2007 passed by the Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt of tower cannot be denied the benefit of above mentioned notifications. The applicant relied upon the order dated 28/02/2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur, whereby the Commissioner has allowed the benefit of Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 01/03/2002, which is under consideration in the present case also, in respect of towers. The Commissioner of Central Excise held that the towers support the propellers/rotors which are essential components of the wind operated electricity generators and the towers manufactured by the assessee are part of the wind operated electricity generators. Hence, entitled for the exemption provided under Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 01/03/2002. The appellants also relied upon another dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hout electric cables, although wind mill may not be able to function without these cables and as such, the benefit of exemption notification No.25/88-CE would not be available in respect of wires and cables as part of wind mill. 9. The contention is that as wires and cables cannot be considered as part of wind mill therefore, the doors in question cannot be considered as part of wind operated electricity generators. 10. We find that in the impugned order, the benefit of Notification No.3/2001-CE dated 01/03/2001 as well as for subsequent period the benefit of Notification No.6/2002-CE dated 01/03/2002 was denied. For ready reference, relevant part of the Notification are reproduced below: The Notification No.3/2001-CE dated 01/03/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icity generators and its components and parts thereof. As the benefit of notification is available to the components and parts thereof, which not in the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nicco Corporation Ltd. (supra). Therefore, ratio of the above decision is not applicable in the facts of the present case. 13. The Revenue is not denied the benefit of notification in respect of the tower of the wind operated electricity generators as held by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur, vide order dated 28/02/2005 and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 10/02/2003 allowed the benefit of notification in question in respect of towers of wind operated electricity generators. The Revenue has not produced any evidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
