2013 (7) TMI 464 - AT - Central Excise

Manufacturing of Windmill doors - Benefit of Notification No.3/2001-CE date 01/03/2001 at Sl. No. 254 and for the subsequent period, the benefit of Notification no. 6/2002-CE dated 01/03/2002 at Sl. No. 237 in respect of Windmill doors manufactured - Decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Nicco Corporation Ltd. case 2006 (3) TMI 48 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA whereby the Hon ble Supreme Court denied the benefit of Notification No. 205/88-CE dated 25/05/1988 in respect of wires and cables Held that - The wordings of the notifications which are under consideration before us are different. The notification No.3/2001-CE & No.6/2002-CE provides exemption from payment of Central Excise duty in respect of wind operated electricity generators and its components and parts thereof The ratio of Nicco Corporation Ltd not applicable in the facts of instant case - Benefit of notification No. 6/2002-CE is allowed to the tower of wind operated electricity generators Decided in favor of Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Denial of benefit of Notification No.3/2001-CE and No.6/2002-CE for Windmill doors manufactured by the appellant
- Interpretation of whether Windmill doors are entitled to the benefit of the notifications

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal against an order denying the benefit of specific notifications for Windmill doors manufactured by them. The appellant claimed that the doors were designed for wind-operated electricity generators and should be entitled to the exemption provided in the notifications. The appellant argued that since the tower, a part of wind-operated electricity generators, was granted the benefit of the notifications, the doors being part of the tower should also qualify. The appellant cited previous decisions where similar components were granted the benefit of notifications. On the other hand, the Revenue relied on a Supreme Court decision regarding wires and cables in windmills to argue that the doors cannot be considered part of wind-operated generators.

The Tribunal analyzed the notifications under consideration, which provided exemptions for wind-operated electricity generators and their components and parts. The Tribunal distinguished the case from the Supreme Court decision by noting that the benefit of the notifications extended to components and parts thereof, unlike the situation in the Supreme Court case. Additionally, the Tribunal highlighted previous orders where the benefit of the notifications was allowed for towers of wind-operated generators, indicating consistency in granting exemptions to related components. Since the Revenue did not challenge these orders, the Tribunal concluded that the doors, being part of the tower, should also be entitled to the benefit of the notifications.

Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant. The decision was based on the interpretation that Windmill doors, as part of the tower of wind-operated electricity generators, are entitled to the exemption provided in the notifications for such components and parts thereof.