2016 (10) TMI 384 - AT - Central Excise

Eligibility of benefit of exemption Notification No. 3/2004-CEX dated 8.1.2004 - Plastic Polythene Film/Sheets - Plastic Polythene Film/Sheets supplied for setting up water supply plant; and a certificate to this effect was issued by Distt. Collector, Bikaner - Held that - The contents of the Notification No. 3/2004-CEX dated 8.1.2004 are very clear that all items of machinery, including instruments, apparatus and appliances, auxiliary equipment and their components/parts required for setting up of water supply plants and pipes needed for delivery of water from its source to the plant and from there to the storage facility , would be eligible for exemption under the Notification No. 3/2004-CEX subject to the certificate issued by Collector/D.C./D.M. of District that such goods were cleared for intended use specified in the Notification No. 3/2004-CEX. The subject goods HDPE Geomembranc Film 1.00 MM Thick cleared and supplied by the appellant is neither an item of machinery mentioned in the notification nor a component/part of the said machinery nor a pipe needed for delivery of water, appearing in the notification. Therefore, the certificate issued by the Distt. Collector, Bikaner and produced by the appellant cannot provide required assistance to the appellant to support their stand - exemption benefit not allowed - appeal rejected - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues: Eligibility of benefit of exemption under Notification No. 3/2004-CEX dated 8.1.2004.

Analysis:
The case involved the eligibility of benefit under Notification No. 3/2004-CEX dated 8.1.2004 concerning the supply of Plastic Polythene Film/Sheets for setting up a water supply plant. The appellant argued that they were entitled to the exemption as a certificate from the District Collector supported the intended use of the supplied item. On the other hand, the Revenue, represented by the ld. AR, maintained the findings of the lower Revenue authorities. The Tribunal carefully examined the facts, submissions, and relevant case laws presented by both sides.

Upon reviewing the contents of Notification No. 3/2004-CEX dated 8.1.2004, the Tribunal noted that the exemption applied to "all items of machinery, instruments, apparatus, appliances, auxiliary equipment, components/parts required for setting up water supply plants," and "pipes for water delivery." However, the Tribunal found that the Plastic Polythene Film/Sheets supplied by the appellant did not fall under any of the mentioned categories in the notification. Therefore, the certificate issued by the District Collector could not support the appellant's claim for exemption. The Tribunal concluded that since the supplied item was not covered by the notification, the appeal lacked merit. The case laws cited by the appellant were also deemed irrelevant. Consequently, the impugned order was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

The judgment was pronounced on 31.8.2016 by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI, comprising Mr. Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President, and Mr. Ashok K. Arya, Member (Technical). Ms. Rinky Arora appeared as the advocate for the appellant, while Shri G.R. Singh represented the respondent. The Tribunal's decision clarified the scope of the exemption notification and emphasized the necessity for the supplied items to align with the specific categories listed in the notification to claim the benefit of exemption.