9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. is for the exemption under Sl.No.16 of the List 9 of the said notification. No claim for exemption is being made under Sl.No.21 as ‘parts’. That being the case, there IS no dispute to be resolved by the Larger Bench as the appellant is claiming/ exemption only under Sl.No.16 - Eligibility of the appellant for exemption under Sl.No.16 has to be examined by the Division Bench considering the scope of the said entry and the nature of the impugned goods for which exemption is claimed - the matter is returned back to the Division Bench, Chandigarh for decision. - Excise Appeal No.1918/2008 - IO/E/31/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 30-3-2017 - Shri (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President, Shri S.K. Mohanty. Member (Judicial) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of such parts for the manufacture of goods specified at S.Nos. 1 to 20 above. 4. The Division Bench observed as below:- 7. The issue came up before the Tribunal in the case of Rachitech Engineers Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein this Tribunal observed as under:- 5. We have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. Sl. No. 237 of the table to the Notification No.6/2002-C.E. covers non-conventional energy devices/systems specified in list 9. Sl. No. 16 of the list 9 covers agricultural, forestry, agro-industrial, industrial, municipal and urban waste conversion devise producing energy . There is no dispute that the chimneys manufactured by the appellant are meant for biomass burning ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulation the Government has made it impossible for any manufacturer who supplies these goods to other units to avail the benefit of the exemption notification. In other words, a plain reading of item 21 indicates that the exemption is available only for captive consumption. When such a condition is stipulated can Tribunal just ignore it? Moreover in the decision cited by the appellant no reasoning has been given to hold that exemption cannot be denied on the ground that the parts are not consumed within the factory of production. In such circumstances we have no other option but to uphold the impugned order. Therefore the appeal is dismissed. And denied the exemption. 9. As there are contrary decisions of this Tribunal on the issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered as 'waste conversion device producing energy' in terms of Sl.No.16. The Sl.No.21 is applicable only to captively consumed parts. 7. We have heard both the sides and perused the appeal records. First of all, we note that there is no conflict between the two decisions cited by the Division Bench. In Rachitech Engineers Pvt. Ltd. - 2015 (326) ELT 377 (Tribunal-Delhi), the Tribunal held that there is no dispute that the chimneys manufactured by the appellants are meant for biomass burning boilers. It was further observed that there is very thin distinction between part and device, as the device is thing made for a particular purpose and since chimney being an internal part of the biomass fired boiler can be treated as a devi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
