9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Order per: P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. -1 . After examining the records and hearing both sides; we are of the view that the appeal itself can be finally disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing with predeposit, we take up the appeal. 2. The short question arising for consideration in this case is whether the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 108/95-CE dated 28-8-1995 (as amended) is liable to be denied to the appellants in respect of the goods supplied by them to a project financed by the International Development Association and approved by the Government of India. The Notification granted total exemption from payment of duty of Excise in respect of goods when supplied to projects financed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficate stated that the above project was assigned to the Project Director, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of West Bengal (project implementation); that M/s. CMS Computers Ltd. were given the contract for executing the project; that the project had been duly financed by the International Development Association and duly approved by the Government of India for implementation by the Government of West Bengal. The certificate further stated that M/s. CMS Computers Ltd. (main contractor) intended to pro cure the subject goods from the appellants without payment of duty under Notification No. 108/95-CE ibid for implementing the above project. The certificate was produced before the jurisdictional officer of Central Excise an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under was not to be denied to the assessee on the ground that the goods were not directly supplied to the project implementing authority. This view taken by the Tribunal in the aforesaid cases was apparently lost sight of by the lower appellate authority. We have also independently examined the nature of the relevant condition stipulated in the Notification. The Notification did not insist that the goods which were intended to be supplied to a project financed by the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank or any other international organisation other than those named in the annexure to the Notification, should be directly supplied to the project implementing authority. The Revenue has no case that the appellants did not fulfil other substan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
