2020 (2) TMI 3 - AT - Central Excise

Supply of cables for research purposes - benefit of N/N. 10/1997- Central Excise dated 1.03.1997 (Sl.No.2) - benefit of notification denied alleging that the wires and cables in running length could not be considered as parts or equipment or accessories of any machines and/or water treatment plant - HELD THAT - In the present case, necessary certificates as required by the N/N.10/97-CE dated 10.03.1997 and N/N. 6/20060CE dated 1.03.2006 have been issued by the Competent Authorities - Tribunal has consistently held that when a certificate was issued by the competent authority regarding specific end-use of goods as required under notification, the exemption cannot be denied. Tribunal in the case of M/S. K.E.I. INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS CCE, JAIPUR 2016 (3) TMI 228 - CESTAT NEW DELHI and M/S. HAVELLS INDIA LIMITED VERSUS CCE, DELHI 2017 (4) TMI 986 - CESTAT NEW DELHI has held that cables supplied to Water Supply/Treatment plant are eligible for exemption under relevant notifications. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of exemption under Notification 10/1997 and 6/2006 for supply of cables to Research Institutions and Water Treatment Plants.
2. Interpretation of certificates issued by Competent Authorities.
3. Application of previous judgments on exemption eligibility.
4. Scope of show cause notice and invocation of extended period.
5. Department's contention and findings of the Original Order and Order in Appeal.

Issue 1: Denial of Exemption under Notifications 10/1997 and 6/2006:
The appellant, a cable manufacturer, supplied cables to Research Institutions and Water Treatment Plants under relevant notifications. The Department alleged the cables did not qualify as parts or equipment, denying the exemption. The Order in Original confirmed the duty demand and penalty, upheld by the impugned order in appeal.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Certificates by Competent Authorities:
The appellant argued certificates from Research Institutions and Water Treatment Plants indicated the cables were for research purposes and plant setup, making them eligible for exemption. They cited previous cases where certificates determined end-use for exemption eligibility.

Issue 3: Application of Previous Judgments on Exemption Eligibility:
The appellant referenced cases distinguishing cables supplied to Research Institutions and Water Treatment Plants for exemption eligibility under relevant notifications, emphasizing the importance of certificates from Competent Authorities.

Issue 4: Scope of Show Cause Notice and Extended Period Invocation:
The appellant contended the Order in Appeal exceeded the show cause notice's scope by alleging the cables were not part of equipment due to being in running length. They argued against invoking an extended period, citing no deliberate suppression of facts and regular filing of returns and audits.

Issue 5: Department's Contention and Findings:
The Department reiterated the findings of the Original Order and Order in Appeal. However, the Tribunal, after reviewing the case records, found the necessary certificates were issued by Competent Authorities, making the exemption claim valid. Relying on previous decisions, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting consequential relief.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of certificates issued by Competent Authorities for exemption eligibility under relevant notifications, disregarding other issues like limitations.