9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalty are not satisfied - Tribunal justified in setting aside the penalty levied under Section 11AC of the Act as well as issuing the direction to recalculate the demand alongwith duty and interest by applying normal period of limitation - 284 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 15-9-2010 - K.A. Puj and H.N. Devani, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Ms. Amee Yajnik, Standing Counsel, for the Appellant. [Order per : K.A. Puj, J. (Oral)]. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Vapi has filed this Tax Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 proposing to formulate the following substantial questions of law for determination and consideration of this Court :- (a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, Lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate will be issued from the appropriate officers of the project and countersigned by the Principal Secretary. Such exemption certificate was issued by the Technical Director and empowered officers of MSEB and countersigned by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra and the same was produced on record certifying that the said equipments/materials were intended for use by MSEB in the above projects. The said projects were financed by Japan Bank of International Co-operation. It is also mentioned in the said certificate that the same was being issued as per requirement under the Notification No. 108/95-C.E. dated28th August, 1995. Similar certificates were issued by the WestBengalState Electricity Board signed by Chief Enginee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssistant Commissioner to allow the exemption. The third Member of the Tribunal has also taken note of the fact that the respondent was supplying to other Government authorities where no such fault was found. It was also noticed that the fact that the Japan Bank of International Co-operation was not an international organisation approved duly in terms of the explanation attached to Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was not readily forthcoming by any records to which the respondent had access and, therefore, he was dependent upon the project implementing authority and the Secretary to the State Governments who were in the better know of the facts. It is also observed that the existence of the certificate is not being denied in the show-cause notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
