9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar Singh (Supdt.) (A.R.) for the Revenue ORDER Per Mrs. Archana Wadhwa : The appellants have made a request to decide the appeal on merits. Accordingly we have gone through the impugned order and have heard ld.A.R. for the Revenue. 2. As per facts on record the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of galvanized steel tubes and pipes falling under chapter 73 of the first schedule to the Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on the ground that the project against international competitive bidding was placed upon M/s. Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. (main contractor) and the appellant's name is not appearing as a sub-contractor. In response the appellant submitted a certificate issued by M/s. Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. showing the description and quantity of goods to be supplied by the appellant. Accordingly the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the goods in question were cleared by the appellant under seven invoices showing the consignment of the same directly for delivery at the project site i.e. Raghunathpur Thermal Power Project. It is also a fact that the main contractor i.e. M/s. Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. have issued a certificate in favour of the appellant vide its reference letter dated 18.04.2001 authorizing the supplie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or arriving at the above finding Tribunal relied upon the precedent decision of the Tribunal in the case of CST Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad-I [2007 (217) E.L.T. 513 (Tri.)]. We may also refer to the Kolkata Bench's decision in the case of Ramsarup Utpadak Unit-II v. CCE, Kolkata-III [2012 (283) E.L.T. 425 (Tri.), wherein after taking note of various precedent decisions, it was held that the denial of b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
