9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Implementing Authorities, M.P. Road Corporation Ltd. Thus, I hold that the appellant fulfils the conditions of the said notification and the exemption is allowable to them under the facts and circumstances under Notification No.108/95 CE - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee. - E/2793/2007-EX [SM] - 71068/2016 - Dated:- 4-11-2016 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) Shri Mayank Garg, Advocate for the Appellant Shri R.K. Mishra, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Department ORDER Per Mr. Anil Choudhary The issue in this appeal by the appellant, a manufacturer of RCC Pipes etc., is whether they have complied with the conditions to avail exemption from Central Excise duty as per provisions of Notificatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for which, the excisable goods were supplied was approved by the Government of India. Further, on scrutiny of the quarterly E.R.1 s returns, it was observed by Revenue that appellant have cleared goods worth of ₹ 23,60,513/- at nil rate of duty under Notification No.108/95, without fulfilling the requirements of the said notification, and accordingly, it was proposed to demand duty amounting to ₹ 3,77,682/- with interest and with further proposal to levy penalty. The SCN was adjudicated vide O-I-O dated 09.03.2007 by the Assistant Commissioner on contest and the proposed demand was confirmed along with equal amount of penalty under Section 11 AC of the Act. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before Ld. Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary or the Secretary Finance, as the case may be, in the concerned State Government or the Union Territory, that the said goods are required for the execution of the said project, and that the said project has been duly approved by the Government of India for implementation by the concerned State Government. 5. The learned counsel urges that from a perusal of the certificate on record dated 18.03.2005 No.ADB/Phase 1/114/EX_Cus/2004/1947 fulfils all the requirements namely, (i) this certificate is issued by the Project implementing Authority, that is, by the Managing Director of M.P. Road Development Corporation, (ii) it certifies that the project is under Loan of Asian Development Bank, (iii) Government of India has approved the project ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtificate produced from the government of India, the exemption is rightly disallowed. 8. Having considered rival contentions, I find that condition No.C (i) deals with where the project is implemented by the Central Government itself and condition No.C(ii) deals with the situation where the project is approved by Government of India for implementation by Government of a State/Union Territory. Accordingly, I hold that only either of the condition C(i) or C(ii) is applicable. Admittedly, in the facts of this case, the project is approved by Government of India to be implemented by the State of Madhya Pradesh through its Public Works Department and the Implementing Authorities, M.P. Road Corporation Ltd. Thus, I hold that the appellant fulf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
