2004 (7) TMI 453 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Benefit of Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. denied by Commissioner of Central Excise.
2. Requirement of producing certificates for availing exemption under the notification.
3. Dispute over evidence of goods being distributed free of cost to economically weaker sections.
4. Interpretation of conditions under the Notification No. 6/2000-C.E.
5. Appellant's compliance with conditions and production of required certificates.

Analysis:
The case involved the denial of the benefit of Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. by the Commissioner of Central Excise to the appellants engaged in the manufacture of nutritious food. The notification exempted food preparations intended for free distribution to economically weaker sections of society under approved programs, subject to the condition of producing certificates from designated officers. The Commissioner denied the benefit citing lack of relevant certificates for supplies made to specific entities like the "World Food Programme" and the Department of Women & Child Development, Rajasthan.

The appellant contended that they had produced certificates from the Director-cum-Dy. Secretary to the Govt. of Rajasthan, indicating the free distribution of goods to the economically weaker sections under approved programs. The Commissioner's denial was based on the absence of evidence proving free distribution by the appellants themselves and the lack of specific language in the certificates regarding the distribution to economically weaker sections.

The Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. required certificates from designated officers confirming the free distribution of food preparations to economically weaker sections under approved programs. The appellant complied with this requirement by producing certificates from relevant authorities in Rajasthan. One such certificate explicitly mentioned the distribution of goods free of cost to the economically weaker sections under approved schemes.

The Appellate Tribunal found that the Revenue did not contest the fact that the goods were indeed distributed free of cost to the economically weaker sections under approved programs. Consequently, the denial of the notification's benefit by the Commissioner was deemed unsustainable. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, recognizing the appellant's compliance with the conditions of the notification and the production of necessary certificates to support their claim.