2018 (6) TMI 1412 - AT - Central Excise

Clearance of pipes for supply of water - the pipes are used for distribution of water beyond the first storage facility - Violation of condition of notification - Benefit of N/N. 06/2002- CE as amended by N/N. 47/2002- CE - case of Revenue is that the pipes which are cleared by the respondent are used not only for the pipes for delivery of water from its source to the water treatment / supply plant and further also - Held that - The facts in this case are not disputed i.e. respondent clears pipes availing benefit of N/N. 06/2002 - CE as amended by N/N. 47/2002 -CE; the pipes are undisputedly used for distribution of water from the storage point - reliance placed in the case of CCE., C. & ST. (A-III), HYDERABAD VERSUS IVRCL INFRASTRUCTURES & PROJECTS LTD. 2008 (12) TMI 198 - CESTAT, BANGALORE , where it was held that the Notification merely talks about the storage facilities and there is no restriction that the water should be delivered only to the first storage point - benefit cannot be denied - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Revenue's appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 36/2009 - Duty exemption on H.D.P.E pipes - Interpretation of Notification No. 06/2002-CE - Whether pipes used for distribution of water beyond the first storage point are eligible for exemption.

Analysis:
The appeal pertains to the Revenue challenging an Order-in-Appeal regarding the duty exemption claimed by the respondents on H.D.P.E pipes under Notification No. 06/2002-CE. The lower authorities contended that the exemption was incorrect, leading to a demand for duty, interest, and penalties. The Adjudicating Authority upheld the demands, which were later set aside by the First Appellate Authority based on previous decisions. The Revenue argued that the pipes were used beyond the permissible storage point, relying on a Board Circular. The respondent cited Tribunal and Apex Court decisions in similar cases to support their claim of exemption eligibility.

Upon review, the Tribunal found that the First Appellate Authority correctly applied the law established by previous Tribunal and Apex Court decisions in similar circumstances. The undisputed fact was that the pipes cleared by the respondent were used for water distribution from the storage point. Citing precedents involving IVRCL Infrastructures & Projects Ltd. and Electrosteel Casting Ltd., the Tribunal concluded that the issue was decisively settled in favor of the respondent. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was upheld as legally sound and free from defects.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, affirming the correctness and legality of the impugned order. The decision was pronounced in open court following a thorough consideration of the submissions and records presented during the hearing.