9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 662X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... denied benefit of notification no. 6/02-CE dated 1st March 2002 on clearance of 30 nos volume bottle valued at Rs. 63,30,000/- to M/s Dresser Rand (I) Ltd, Ahmedabad. Consequently, the duty liability of Rs. 10,33,056/- held to be recoverable under section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944, along with interest thereon, and imposition of penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- under rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was confirmed in the impugned order causing grievance to appellant. 2. It is the submission of Learned Counsel for appellant that they had been relieved from liability to duty on these goods in accordance with the exemption notification (supra) which allowed that privilege if such goods, when imported into India, were exempt from duty b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 4. It is not in dispute that the volume bottles were supplied for a project which was being executed for M/s ONGC and that the said project had been awarded by M/s ONGC in an international competitive bidding process . As pointed out by the Learned Counsel, the first appellate authority has placed on record that the appellant may have been extended the benefit of exemption notification if their claim, that these are necessary for the compressor facility, had been substantiated by evidence from M/s Dresser Rand (I) Ltd and from M/s ONGC to that effect. We now find that M/s Dresser Rand (I) Ltd did issue certificate dated 10th April 2009 indicating that: "the assembly viz compressor is complete by itself when it is manufactured at our fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... free clearance envisaged at serial no. 301 read with condition no. 64 in notification no. 6/2002-CE, is available to the appellant. 6. Turning to the second ground for denial of the exemption, viz. participation in international competitive bidding process , we are in agreement with the decision of Tribunal in Toshniwal Industries Pvt. Ltd, which has held that: "6. After hearing both sides and on perusal of record, it appears that the Tribunal has decided (supra) that it is not necessary that the manufacturer supplying the goods to the mega power projects should have participated in International Competitive Bidding so long as the goods are supplied to such contract was awarded to a person who took part in the International Competitive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
