2016 (3) TMI 613 - AT - Central Excise

Benefit of exemption Notification No.6/2002-CE denied - demand of duty alongwith interest and imposed penalty - Held that - We have already observed that the Condition of the notification is that the goods covered in any Chapter supplied through international competitive biddings is exempted, subject to the conditions, if the goods are exempted from custom duty. In the present case, the Adjudicating authority has accepted the fact that the Compressors are exempted from Customs duty and therefore, there is no reason to deny the benefit of exemption notification.- Decided in favour of assessee

Issues:
1. Denial of benefit of exemption Notification No.6/2002-CE to the Assessee.
2. Use of imported components in the manufacture of Gas Compressors.
3. Interpretation of the conditions of the exemption notification.
4. Evidence of goods supplied through international competitive biddings.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Denial of benefit of exemption Notification No.6/2002-CE
The Assessee was engaged in manufacturing Gas Compressor packages under Sub-heading No.8414.86 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They supplied these compressors to specific projects based on international competitive biddings. The Adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty, interest, and penalty, denying the benefit of exemption Notification No.6/2002-CE to the Assessee. The Assessee contended that the compressors were exempted from Customs duty, making them eligible for the exemption notification. The Tribunal observed that the Adjudicating authority erred in denying the benefit as the compressors were indeed exempted from Customs duty, thus allowing the Assessee's appeal.

Issue 2: Use of imported components
The Revenue argued that since the Assessee used imported components on which Customs duty was paid in manufacturing the compressors, they were not eligible for the exemption. The Tribunal, however, noted that the condition of the exemption notification focused on the final product being exempted from Customs duty, not the components used in its manufacture. As the compressors themselves were exempted, the use of imported components did not disqualify the Assessee from availing the exemption.

Issue 3: Interpretation of exemption notification conditions
The Tribunal analyzed the conditions of Notification No.6/2002-CE and emphasized that goods supplied through international competitive biddings were exempted from duty if they were also exempted from Customs duty. The Adjudicating authority's interpretation regarding the imported components was deemed incorrect, as the focus should be on the final product's exemption status. The Tribunal clarified that the Assessee met the conditions of the notification, making them eligible for the exemption.

Issue 4: Evidence of goods supplied through international competitive biddings
The Tribunal previously directed the Assessee to provide evidence of supplying goods through international competitive biddings. The Assessee submitted certificates from ONGC confirming the international competitive biddings for the projects to which the compressors were supplied. This evidence supported the Assessee's claim and further reinforced their eligibility for the exemption. The Tribunal, based on the evidence presented, set aside the impugned orders, allowed the Assessee's appeal, and rejected the Revenue's appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Assessee, emphasizing their eligibility for the exemption under Notification No.6/2002-CE due to the exempt status of the compressors and the evidence of supplying goods through international competitive biddings.

← Previous Next →