9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1066X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CPUs, claimed the concessional rate of CVD as per Notification NO.6/2002-CE dt. 01/03/2002 (Sl.No.261). In the said serial number, an explanation was inserted by way of amendment vide Notification No.23/2004 dt. 09/07/2004. The lower authorities did not extend the benefit of concessional duty and demanded the differential duty. Aggrieved by the said decision, the present appeal has been filed. 2. With the above background, we heard Shri Ramesh Sharma, consultant for the appellant as well as Shri Naveen Kushalappa, authorised representative for the Revenue. 3. Learned consultant submits that the applicability of the amended explanation inserted on 09/07/2004 has been held to be available even for the earlier period as observed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heading No./ Sub heading Description of Goods Rate of duty 261 84.71 Computer Explanation : For the purposes of this exemption, the value of computer shall be the value of the Computer excluding the value of Software pre-loaded on the computer, with or without an accompanying media. 8% Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 was once again amended vide Notification No. 23/2004-C.E., dated 9-7-2004. After this amendment, Sl. No. 261 reads as follows : Sl. No. Chapter/ Heading No./ Sub heading Description of Goods Rate of duty 261 Any Chapter Following goods namely :- (a) Computers of heading 84.71 (b) Parts used within the factory of production for manufacture of computers of heading 84.71. Explanation: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vered under Chapter heading 84.71. Hence when this server is a computer, it conforms the definition of computer and when it falls under 84.71 as given in the entry in the notification then the benefit cannot be denied. For reason that an amendment was carried out on 9-7-2004 and the amendment gives the explanation that the computer includes CPU cleared separately, the Commissioner comes to the conclusion that the CPU cleared separately prior to this date would not be entitled for the exemption notification. Such reasoning is wrong. In our view this explanation is only clarificatory in nature and it will have retrospective effect in the light of the case laws submitted by the appellants. Consequently the impugned order has no merit and is li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
