2023 (5) TMI 1339 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT Credit - TMT bars were sold by the appellant, which are used in Mega Power Project against the goods to be supplied against the international competitive bidding - benefit of N/N. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 - HELD THAT - In the case of Industrial Perforation (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2019 (12) TMI 111 - CESTAT KOLKATA , this Tribunal has observed the only condition is that goods are cleared under International Competitive Bidding for use in the specified Mega Power Projects which are exempted from customs duty. The supply of subject goods in the instant case for Mega Power Project under International Competitive Bidding is on record and not in dispute. Moreover, since the case of the appellant has already been settled by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal as noted above, the appellant is legally entitled to exemption from payment of Central Excise duty and thus the duty demand is not sustainable. It is not in dispute that the subject goods are used for Mega Power Project through International Competitive Bidding. Therefore, by relying on the above cited decisions, the appellant is entitled for the exemption as claimed. There are no merit in the impugned order and the same is set aside - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against denial of cenvat credit, imposition of penalty, and recovery of interest.

Summary:
1. The appellant supplied TMT Bars at nil rate of duty to a Mega Power Project, claiming exemption under Notification No.21/2002-Cus. A show-cause notice alleged non-payment of Central Excise duty during a specific period.
2. The appellant acted as a sub-contractor for supplying steel for the project, but the goods were not covered under the exemption notification, leading to denial of exemption.
3. The appellant contended that the goods were supplied against international competitive bidding for a Mega Power Project, citing precedents to support their claim.
4. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, stating that denial of exemption was not legally sustainable based on previous decisions and fulfillment of conditions except for classification under the Customs Notification.
5. The Tribunal observed that the goods were used for Mega Power Projects through international competitive bidding, entitling the appellant to the claimed exemption.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed based on the appellant's entitlement to exemption under the relevant notifications.