9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 789X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UN) had procured and supplied diesel-HSD, as duty free diesel was not available from the warehouse of IOC due to Notification No.17/2004-CE (withdrawal of duty-free warehousing facility) is entitled to refund under Notification No.108/95-CE dated 28.08.1995 as held by learned Commissioner (Appeals). 2. The admitted facts in the appeal are that as per contract agreement dated 12.03.2001 between National Highways Authority of India (Ministry of Road Transport & Highways) and M/s Controdorstory, Kyzetsky Most, 19, Moscow - 103031, Russia, the work of four laning and strengthing of existing two lane section on NH2 (Construction Package-II-C) in Uttar Pradesh under Third National Highway world Bank Project was entrusted to M/s Controdorstory, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of Diesel (HSD) from IOC, Panki Terminal. 3. The National Highway Authority of India, Ministry of Transport and Highways had issued a certificate dated 07.08.2002 for procurement of 5,000 KL diesel from IOC without payment of Central Excise duty. The adjudicating authority issued show-cause-notice on the ground that it is not understood, as to why the respondent started procuring the said goods after 30.09.2004 on payment of duty, that is after issue of Notification No.17/2004-CE(NT). Further, the respondent did not produce any evidence, document or otherwise, which could give any evidence that they have not collected the duty element from the principal. Thus, two separate show-cause-notices were issued for the two refund claims and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was further urged that the respondent is the ultimate consumer of the said goods in relation to the execution of the said World Bank Project. 5. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) was pleased to allow the appeal appreciating that in view of the subsequent Notification No.17/2004-CE, the respondent had to procure duty paid petroleum products/diesel in spite of being in possession of the exemption certificate as required under Notification 108/95 and further found that the appellant had regarding consumption of diesel procured, for use in specified project and non-passing of duty incidence had produced affidavit, declaration of principal contractor duty supported by a certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant to this effect to prove th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cept a manufacturer could be treated as entitled to the benefit of exemption Notification No.108/95-CE. 7. The respondent-assessee is absent in spite of notice. I also find that the respondent was absent on the earlier three dates also and accordingly the appeal is taken up for disposal ex parte. 8. Considered the contentions of learned AR and perused the records. I find that the Revenue is not disputing the eligibility of removal of goods without duty to the road construction project which have been financed by World Bank, a unit of United Nations and further Revenue is also not disputing the eligibility of supply of duty-free goods to the project in question. The only dispute being raised is that it is the manufacturer only, who is enti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
