2014 (4) TMI 51 - AT - Central Excise

Exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CE dated 01.03.97 - Clearance of computer system for research purpose - Assessee did not produce a certificate from DSIR but they have only produced a certificate from the Registrar of Nagarjuna University - Held that - respondent would require to produce a certificate from the Head of the Institution in each case at the time of clearance of the goods that they are intended to use exclusively for research purpose only. The institution is required to be registered with DSIR. The contention of the Ld. AR that the respondent produced the certificate of the Registrar of the University and therefore they have not fulfilled the condition of the said notification. The contention of the Ld. AR that a certificate of registration from DSIR is required is not sustainable. It is not the case of Revenue that institution is not registered with DSIR. We agree with the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that they have fulfilled the condition of the notification that essentiality certificate was obtained from the Registrar of the University to clear the impugned goods. The Revenue has not challenged the authenticity of the certificate in any manner and therefore they have to accept the certificate from the Registrar of the University - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Order-in Appeal No. 09/2004
- Exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CE

Analysis:
1. Appeal against Order-in Appeal No. 09/2004:
The Revenue filed an appeal against Order-in Appeal No. 09/2004 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Chennai. The appeal was related to a demand of duty concerning clearances of computer systems made to specific institutions during a particular period. The Original authority confirmed part of the demand but dropped the rest. The Revenue appealed against the dropped demand, but the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal.

2. Exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CE:
The respondent claimed exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CE dated 01.03.97. The notification required a certificate from the Head of the Institution at the time of clearance, certifying that the goods are for research purposes only if the institution is registered with the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR). The Revenue contended that the certificate produced by the respondent was from the Registrar of the University and not from DSIR, thus not meeting the notification's conditions.

3. The original authority found that the supplies were for research purposes based on an Essentiality Certificate from the University Registrar. The DSIR guidelines for issuing essentiality certificates were also considered. The Tribunal noted that the notification required a certificate from the Head of the Institution for research purposes and registration with DSIR. The Revenue argued for DSIR registration, but as the institution was not challenged to be unregistered, the Tribunal upheld the University Registrar's certificate. Therefore, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, affirming the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision.

4. The Tribunal also disposed of the cross-objection filed by the respondents. The decision was dictated and pronounced in open court, concluding the case.