2019 (5) TMI 49 - AT - Central Excise

Benefit of N/N. 06/2006-CE, dated 01.03.2006 as amended - cast iron fittings manufactured by the appellant - It is the case of the Revenue that the appellant is not entitled to the benefit of this notification insofar as the cast iron fittings are concerned since the notification specifically covers only pipes needed for delivery of water and did not include the fittings - HELD THAT - The present case is with respect to the eligibility of exemption notification which explicitly does not cover the pipe fittings. Therefore, no benefit can be extended to the pipe fittings in the absence of an exemption notification - The appellant assessee is not eligible for the benefit of exemption notification - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Eligibility of cast iron fittings for exemption under notification No. 06/2006-CE, dated 01.03.2006.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, a manufacturer of Cast Iron Pipes, Fittings, and Scrap, paid Central Excise duty. The issue is whether the cast iron fittings are eligible for exemption under the notification. The Revenue argues that fittings are not covered, as the notification specifies exemption only for pipes for water delivery. The appellant relies on a Supreme Court judgment stating that fittings should be considered part of pipes. The show cause notice for duty recovery and penalties is challenged by the appellant.

2. The appellant contends that the Supreme Court judgment supports their eligibility for exemption. However, the Revenue argues that the judgment was based on the old tariff and does not apply to the new context. The exemption notification should be strictly construed in favor of the Revenue, as per a constitutional Bench judgment. The key issue is whether the appellant is entitled to exemption for pipe fittings under the specific notification.

3. The first appellate authority allowed exemption for certain pipes but denied it for fittings. The question is whether the benefit of exemption can extend to fittings not explicitly covered in the notification. The Supreme Court judgment cited by the appellant does not directly apply to the exemption eligibility. The strict interpretation of exemption notifications, as per the Apex Court, requires any doubt to be resolved in favor of the Revenue. The decision hinges on whether pipe fittings can be included under the exemption notification.

4. The Tribunal finds that the appellant is not entitled to the exemption for pipe fittings under the notification. Even if there are differing views, the one favoring the Revenue must be adopted. The judgment emphasizes strict interpretation of exemption notifications. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed, and the impugned order denying exemption to the appellant is upheld.