2011 (5) TMI 774 - AT - Central Excise

Whether the Tubes Pipes & Hollow profiles of seamless Iron supplied by the respondent to BARC could be treated as accessories and spare parts of Scientific & Technical instruments/apparatus or equipments Held that - institution has given a certificate counter-signed by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India that these items are accessories or spare parts of scientific and technical instruments used for the research purpose only Revenue s appeal dismissed

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether tubes, pipes, and hollow profiles of seamless iron supplied by the manufacturer to a research institution qualify for duty exemption under Notification No. 10/97.
2. Whether the items supplied fall under the category of scientific and technical instruments, apparatus, equipment, accessories, or spare parts as per the conditions of the notification.

Issue 1:
The case involved the manufacturer supplying tubes, pipes, and hollow profiles of seamless iron to a research institution, seeking duty exemption under Notification No. 10/97. The notification exempts specific items supplied to certain research institutions subject to prescribed conditions. The dispute arose when the department argued that the supplied items did not qualify as scientific and technical instruments, apparatus, equipment, or accessories/spare parts under the notification. The Asst. Commissioner initially dropped the show-cause notice proceedings, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The department then filed an appeal against this decision.

Issue 2:
The main contention revolved around whether the supplied tubes, pipes, and hollow profiles of seamless iron could be considered as accessories and spare parts of scientific and technical instruments, apparatus, or equipment. The department argued that fulfilling the conditions in Column 4 of the notification was not enough, and the items supplied must fall under the category specified in Column 3. The department relied on previous tribunal judgments to support its claim that certain items, like D.G. Sets and Control Panel or unglazed vitrified ceramic tiles, were not eligible for exemption under similar notifications.

Judgment:
The Tribunal carefully considered the submissions and records. It acknowledged that the conditions in Column 4 of the notification were met, and the dispute centered on whether the supplied items qualified as accessories and spare parts of scientific and technical instruments. The Tribunal found that when the research institution provided a certificate, countersigned by a Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, stating that the items were indeed accessories or spare parts for research purposes, it was challenging to dispute this claim. The Tribunal distinguished previous judgments cited by the department involving different items, emphasizing that the disputed items in this case were indeed accessories or spare parts for scientific and technical instruments. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and disposed of the Cross Objection accordingly.