9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1074X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Customs Tariff Heading 98.01 of the Customs Tariff Act, Sl. No.26 of the Notification No.42/96-Cus. dated 23.7.1996 extended the benefit of Project Imports for Drinking Water Supply Projects for supply of water for human or animal consumption with the following Explanation: "Drinking Water Supply Project includes a plant for desalination, demineralization or purification of water or for carrying out any similar process or processes intended to make the water fit for human or animal consumption but does not include a plant supplying water for industrial purposes." Notification No.21/2002-Cus. dated 1.3.2002 as amended (Sl. No.401A) also extended the benefit of 'nil' rate of duty for basic customs duty as well as for additional duty of cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ater distribution systems. The Bangalore Bench differed with the view expressed by the Bombay Bench and referred the matter to Hon'ble President for constituting a Larger Bench to decide the issue. In the meantime, the decision of the Bombay Bench in the case of Pratibha Industries Ltd. (supra) came up before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was decided as reported in 2015 (320) ELT A273 (SC), wherein the decision of Bombay Bench was upheld. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Since the issue stands finally decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court, both the appeals are taken up for decision without waiting for the decision of the Larger Bench. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pratibha Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for rendering source water supply fit for drinking by the humans and animals. Hence, the same were not eligible to benefit under Heading 98.01 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 read with Notification No. 21/2002-Cus." In the appeals before us, the appellants have imported pipes and utilized the same for drinking water supply project and not for water treatment project. Hence, in the light of the apex court decision, appellants will not be entitled to the benefit of Project Import as well as Customs Notification No.21/2002. 4.1 The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of J. V. Gokal & Co.: 2017 (348) ELT 445 (Bom.) followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pratibha Industries and held that Sl. No.26 of Notification N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
