2015 (10) TMI 1336 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of exemption claim - Customs Notification No. 42/96 dated 23.07.96 - Held that - Goods cleared were used in Drinking water supply project, which is a notified project under the aforesaid notification. The notification has flown under clause (6) of CTH 9801. Reference to CTH 9801 finds place in notification No. 6/06-CE dated 01.03.06 as well as notification No. 12/11-CE dt. 07.03.12. Reading of the customs notification, tariff heading, nature of goods cleared and central excise notifications enables to hold that the goods cleared by appellant were meant for Drinking water supply project only. The goods so used was certified by the appropriate authority. Therefore in absence of any contrary evidence, the goods cleared by appellant cannot be denied exemption. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of Customs Tariff entry 9801 for exemption
- Allegation of goods not being meant for Drinking Water Supply Project

Interpretation of Customs Tariff entry 9801 for exemption:
The appellant argued that the goods cleared were intended for the execution of a Drinking Water Supply Project under international competitive bidding (ICB) and fell under Customs Tariff entry 9801 as per relevant notifications. The notifications exempted goods imported to India under CTH 9801 for use in the mentioned project. The appellant supplied goods certified for use in the project, as confirmed by authorities. The Revenue contended that the goods were not covered by CTH 9801. After considering both arguments, the Tribunal found that the goods cleared by the appellant were indeed used in the Drinking Water Supply Project, as evidenced by the appeal folder and relevant notifications. The Tribunal concluded that the goods qualified for exemption under CTH 9801 and allowed the appeal.

Allegation of goods not being meant for Drinking Water Supply Project:
The Revenue alleged that the goods supplied by the appellant were not intended for the Drinking Water Supply Project. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, reviewed the evidence presented. The Tribunal noted that the appellant's contention regarding the intended use of the goods for the project was supported by documentation in the appeal folder. The Tribunal found that the goods were indeed used in the Drinking Water Supply Project, as certified by the appropriate authority. Considering the lack of contrary evidence, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the goods cleared for the project could not be denied exemption. The Tribunal allowed the appeal based on the factual findings and reasoning presented during the proceedings.