TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 978X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IAL) And SHRI RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Vinod Awtani, C.A. for Appellant Shri S.J. Sahu, AC (AR) for Respondent Per: Raju The appellants M/s Tapi Prestressed Products Ltd. and Mahesh Vasudevo Buti are in appeal against the confirmation of demand and imposition of penalty. 2. Learned C.A. appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of Pre-stressed Concrete Pipes. The appellant claimed exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-CE Sr. No. 196A. The said entry provides full exemption to certain items used for setting up of water treatment plants intending to make water supply for human and animal consumption. The appellants obtained necessary certificate from Collector ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Tribunal is reproduced below . 8. After hearing both sides and perusal of the case records, we find that in the impugned notification, pipes needed for delivery of water from its source to the plant and from there to the storage facilities have been exempted subject to the requirement of obtaining a certificate Collector, District Magistrate, Deputy Commissioner of the District in which the plant is located. We find that the required certificates have been obtained by the respondents clearly showing that the impugned pipes were needed for delivery of water from the plant to the storage facilities. Secondly, we find that the Notification merely talks about the storage facilities and there is no restriction that the water should b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perintendent violated the instructions of the Department in not issuing a Show Cause notice and giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondents before passing a non-speaking order. In such a situation, where the Superintendent put a restriction on the clearance, the respondents had no option but to go to the lower Appellate Authority for Redressal of their grievance. Moreover, under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under the Act by a Central Excise Officer lower in rank than the Commissioner can appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals). Since in the instant case, the Superintendent is a Central Excise Officer lower in rank than the Commissioner and he had communicated the decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
