TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 935X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the United Nations or an International Organization and approved by the Government of India. It is sufficient to extract the first portion of the Notification to appreciate this point. In other words, the supply made to the Organization indicated in the Notification for their official use as well as supply made to the projects financed by them, are both included within the purview of the Notification. It may be open, to the Department to contend, in some cases where the supply is made for the official use of International Organization that such supply should have been made directly. We are not saying this as an interpretation to the Notification, but indicating that at least if a case falls within the first limb, there is some possibil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai. It was admitted on 22.8.2008 on the following substantial questions of law:- 1. Whether it is right in granting exemption, when the goods werre not supplied either to the project or to the concerned International Organization funding the project but were supplied to the individual contractors who own these goods and not in any way under obligation to the Project Authority to use the goods in execution of the Project ? 2. When the certificates were produced by the second respondent after clearance of the goods which is contrary to the conditions of the notification, whether first respondent is correct in holding that revenue has no case that appellants di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification dated 28.8.1995; (iii) that the life span of the computers was around 6 years, but they may be used in the project only for one year or less, making the computers available for use for other purposes; (iv) that the computers were supplied not directly to the project but through intermediary by name M/s. CMS Computers Limited, Kolkatta ; and (v) that the Exemption Certificates were not countersigned by the Principal Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, as required by the Exemption Notification. 6. The assessee submitted a detailed reply. Thereafter, the Additional Commissioner passed an Order in Original bearing No.6/2005 dated 3.6.2005. In the Order in Original, the Additional Commissioner recorded the foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, on the only ground that the intended goods were not directly delivered to the Project Authorities but to an intermediary contractor. In other words, the Appellate Authority did not set aside the other findings which were part of the imputations raised in the show cause notice. 9. The assessee filed further appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal on the basis of its own decisions in Caterpillar India Pvt. Ltd., v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pondicherry [2005 (185) ELT 430]; Automatic Electric Ltd., v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2004 (178) ELT 524] and SP ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) (hereinafter referred to as the said goods) when supplied to the United Nations or an International Organization for their official use or supplied to the projects financed by the said United Nations or an International Organization and approved by the Government of India, from the whole of- 12. The focus of the Notification is actually only on two things namely (a) goods when supplied to the United Nations or an International Organization for their official use or (b) goods supplied to the projects financed by the United Nations or the International Organization and approved by the Government of India. 13. In other words, the supply made to the Organization indicated in the Notification for their off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sly to be answered against the appellant/Revenue, in view of the fact that the case on hand falls within the second limb namely supply to the project financed by the United Nations. 16. Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department placed heavy reliance upon the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Dee Development Engineers Limited v. Union of India [2010 (254) ELT 412], in support of his contention that the goods ought to have been supplied directly to the project, to enable the assessee to claim the benefit of the Exemption Notification. 17. But with great respect, we find that in para 16 of its decision in Dee Development Engineers, the Punjab and Haryana High Court did not deal with the differen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
