9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 472X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by Government of India and finance by such organizations and certified by such organization that the said goods are intended for such use, then such goods are exempted from the whole of duty of Central Excise. We find that various certificates and purchase orders and instruction of UNICEF to deliver the goods at various places and certificate issued by Procurement Officers of UNICEF which were produced before the first appellate authority were sufficient proof to establish the eligibility of appellant to the benefit of the said notification No. 108/95. The understanding of first appellate authority that goods were not supplied directly to United Nations Organization but supplied to a project and is covered by Clause (b)(ii) of the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .1995. It appeared to Revenue that the appellants were not eligible for the benefit of said Notification because the appellant had not supplied goods to UNICEF directly but goods were supplied to project assisted and Financed by UNICEF and therefore the appellants were issued with show cause notice dated 08/09/2005 for the demand of Central Excise Duty of ₹ 13,76,762/- by proposing to deny the appellants benefit of the said notification. Subsequently for the period from April, 2005 to March, 2006 appellants cleared said goods involving duty of ₹ 8,15,869/-. They were issued a show cause notice C.No. VI (MP) Dem (12) Adj-19/2006 SCN No. 46/Jt.COMMR.Alld./2006 dated 21/12/2006 demanding Central Excise Duty amounting to ₹ 8,1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9.03.2007 wherein it was held that it was clear that the goods were not supplied directly to UNICEF but were supplied to projects and the situation is covered under Clause (b) (ii) of the said notification and Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) did not interfere in the said Order in Original dated 26/09/2006. Assessee preferred appeal against the said two Orders in Original dated 19.3.2008 and 29.2.2008 before Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) who has decided the said appeal through impugned order in appeal No. 105, 106/CE/APPL/ALLD/08 wherein he declined to interfere with the said Orders in Original. Against the said Orders-in-Appeal the appellant is before us. 4. The grounds of the appeal inter-alia include that the goods in question were supplied t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal Organizations is appended through amendment by notification No. 40/99-CE dated 02.11.99 and shown us that UNICEF is included in the list of International Organization in the said annexure. 6. The ld. A.R. has reiterated their arguments in the impugned orders in Appeal. 7. We have gone through the rival contentions. We find that the said notification as amended by notification No.40/99 dated 02/11/99 at clause (b) (i) provides that the goods supplied to organizations appearing in the annexure for the projects that is approved by Government of India and finance by such organizations and certified by such organization that the said goods are intended for such use, then such goods are exempted from the whole of duty of Central Excis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
