Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s National Engineering Ind. Ltd. Versus Commissioner Central Excise-I, Central Revenue Building, Statute Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur

2017 (11) TMI 879 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

Benefit of N/N. 63/95-CE dated 16.03.1995 - Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in interpreting N/N. 63/95-CE dated 16.03.1995 and holding that the appellant is not entitled to claim exemption under N//N. 63/95-CE dated 16.03.1995 from Central Excise duty on the goods supplied to Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. (BEML) for further supplying to Ministry of Defence and is liable for payment of Central Excise duty amounting to ₹ 22,49,354/- such conclusion is legally sustainable in the eye of law .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

timately meant for supply for Ministry of Defence - the appellant will be entitled for the refund - appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee. - D. B. Central/Excise Appeal No. 5 / 2011 - Dated:- 8-11-2017 - K. S. Jhaveri And Vijay Kumar Vyas, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Sunil Nath with Mr. Archit Bohra For the Respondent : Mr. Anurag Kalawatia JUDGMENT 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the tribunal whereby tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uty amounting to ₹ 22,49,354/- such conclusion is legally sustainable in the eye of law? 2.1 When the matter was last listed before the court, counsel for the appellant has argued the matter at length and counsel for the respondent sought time to verify whether Circular dt. 23.6.2006 is applicable in the case of appellant or not. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellant M/s National Engineering Industries Ltd., Khatipura Road, Jaipur (here-in-after called Appellants) are engaged in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ose BEML had to take advance action to procure components required for manufacture of the said wagons. The Roller Bearing Axle Box Assembly was one of the essential components for the manufacture of the said BFAT Wagons. This item was required to be procured by BEML from other manufacturers who engaged in manufacture of the said item according to the drawings and specifications for use in the said BFAT Wagons. Accordingly, BEML had identified M/s National Engineering Industries Ltd., Jaipur to m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2,49,354/- supplied to M/s BEML during the period from November, 2004 to June 2005 and had sought to claim exemption under Notification No.63/95-CE dated 16.03.1995. 3.2 The counsel for the appellant relied on the certificated dated 6.3.2005 which reads as under: REF:- RMA/WA/81/88/756607 Date:06-03-2005 TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN The Ministry of Defence has placed order on M/s. Bharat Earth Movers ltd. (herein after referred to as BEML) for the manufacture of the following equipment under res .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eering Inds Ltd. Khatipura Road, Jaipur - 302006 WA/81/88/756607 dtd: 14.09.2004 Qty: 1284 Nos 20.3 Ton Roller Bearing Axlebox Assy, complete. ₹ 20967720=00 For Bharat Earth Movers ltd. Sd/- H.S. PRAKASH General Manager, Materials, 3.3 He further contended that the specific contention which has been found in the order of CIT(A) reads as under:- 5. I have gone through the case record, submissions made by the appellants in appeal memorandum and at the time of personal hearing. I find that, t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion by a sub-contractor supplying goods to Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. The Appellant has also contended that, the Notification No.63/95 has replaced the Notification No. 184/86, the Trade Notice and instruction applicable on that Notification would also be applicable in the case in this regard. I find that, the Adjudicating Authority has conducted enquiry at the buyer's end and come to conclusion that the goods supplied by the Appellant were not cleared to defence. This fact has not been chall .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

enied to the Appellant. Further, I also find that para 3 of the Circular No.5/92 clarifies that "The position will of course different if any of the job worker are clearing the goods directly from their units for excise purpose on a principal to principal basis and are not returning the goods for eventual clearance to any of the five unit listed in the Notification". In view of this, I also find that, there is no evidence on record to prove that the relation between the Appellant and B .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and wrongly held as under:- 9. Plain reading of the above narrated portion of the Notification would disclose that, the exemption available thereunder is if manufactured by units which were mentioned in the said column no.3 and such goods are supplied to the Ministry of Defence for official purposes. Obviously, therefore, in order to claim exemption under the said Notification, it is not sufficient that the goods are manufactured by the units mentioned in the said column, but such goods must be .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.2006 which is produced for the first time alongwith the paper book which reads as under:- F. No. 201 / 22 / 2006 - Cx.6 1. Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs ********* New Delhi dated 23rd June 2006 To All the Chief Commissioners of Central Excise 2. All the Commissioners of Central Excise All the Director Generals under Central Board of Excise & Customs. Sir, Subject:- Exemption from duty for raw materials procured under noti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cified in the notification and are sent back for further processing, the benefit under preceding notification No. 184 / 86 dated 01.03.1986. Doubts have been raised whether this notification is applicable if one of the units mentioned in this list instead of supplying goods to directly of Ministry of Defence, made its supply to another unit mentioned in the said list, who in turn after using the said goods for further processing will supply the final goods to the Ministry of Defence. 2. The issu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e units are covered under the said notification and goods are ultimately supplied for use by Ministry of Defence. Therefore, it is clarified that even if goods are cleared / sold by the first unit to the second unit, it is covered by the said notification since it is ultimately meant for supply for Ministry of Defence. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Rahul Nangare) Under secretary (Cx.6&8) 3.6 He also relied upon the following judgments:- 1. Delco Incorporated vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Bangalore ( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version