9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 754 - AT - CustomsEligibility for benefit of exemption under Notification No.06/2006-CE (Sl. No.84) - imported goods (Tubular Tower) are parts of the Wind Operated Electricity Generator or not - HELD THAT - As per list 5 wind operated electricity generator, its components and parts thereof including rotor and wind turbine controller are eligible for exemption. The issue as to whether towers form part of WOEG was considered by the Tribunal in the case of HYUNDAI UNITECH ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION LTD. VERSUS CCE., NAGPUR 2005 (7) TMI 129 - CESTAT, MUMBAI where it was held that When the exemption in respect of the excise duty is granted to the parts of the wind operated electricity generator at the time of clearance from their factory and the Tribunal having held that the tower is a part of wind operated electricity generator, ratio of the above decision of the Tribunal squarely applies t the facts of the present case. Undisputedly, the goods manufactured by the appellants and cleared by them were meant for wind operated electricity generator, being tower material and, as such, were entitled to the benefit of Notification 6/2000. Thus the appellant is eligible for the benefit of exemption as per the Notification No.6/2006-C.E. - appeal allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Eligibility of Tubular Towers as parts of Wind Operated Electricity Generators (WOEG) for exemption under Notification No.06/2006-CE (Sl. No.84). Summary: Issue 1: Eligibility of Tubular Towers for Exemption under Notification No.06/2006-CE The issue that arises for analysis in this appeal is whether the imported goods (Tubular Tower) are parts of the Wind Operated Electricity Generator and eligible for benefit of exemption under Notification No.06/2006-CE (Sl. No.84). The appellant, engaged in Wind Power Generation and manufacturing of WOEG, imported various components including towers and availed the benefit of 7.5% Basic Customs Duty (BCD) and 'nil' rate of Countervailing Duty (CVD) under Sl.No.84 of Notification No.06/2006. The Department contended that the towers are classifiable under CTH 7308 and thus not eligible for the said benefit. The appellant argued that the towers are integral parts of WOEG, supported by documents evidencing their use in wind generating units. The learned counsel for the appellant referenced the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CCE Nagpur Vs. Hyundai Unitech Electrical Transmission Ltd. 2015 (323) ELT 220 (S.C.) and Circular No. 1008/15/2015-CX dated 20.10.2015, which clarified that towers supporting nacelle, rotor, and wind turbine controller are parts of WOEG and eligible for exemption. The Tribunal considered similar cases, including Hyundai Unitech Electrical Transmission Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Nagpur 2005 (187) ELT 312 (Tri. Mumbai) and Gemini Instratech Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE Nashik 2014 (300) ELT 446 (Tri. Mum.), where it was held that components such as towers and doors of wind operated electricity generators are entitled to exemption under relevant notifications. The Tribunal also noted the larger Bench decision in Rakhok Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise 2016 (338) ELT 449 (Tri. L.B.), which affirmed that parts specifically designed for attaching the tower to the ground are eligible for exemption under Notification No.6/2006 dated 01.03.2006. After appreciating the facts and following the decision of the Apex Court, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant is eligible for the benefit of exemption as per Notification No.06/2006-CE. The impugned order denying the exemption and demanding differential duty was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief as per law. (Pronounced in the open court on 17.03.2023)
|
