9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tification. The claim of the appellant in the case in hand is incorrect as to that they are eligible for the benefit of notification. Penalty - Held that:- The issue involved in this case being in respect of interpretation of the Notification No. 63/95, appellant may have entertained a bonafide belief and also may be guided by various decisions of the Tribunal - In view of this confused situation prevailing during the period in question, appellant should not be visited with any penalties - penalty set aside. Appeal allowed in part. - Appeal No. E/1935/2010 - A/31124/2018 - Dated:- 7-8-2018 - Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And Mr. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri M. V. S. Prasad, Advocate for the Appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de to Defence Organization. It is his submission that the appellants had supplied various goods to BEL and as per the communication given by the Ministry of Finance to BEL/BEML, vendors also eligible for the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 63/95 if the goods are supplied to BEL/BEML, HAL etc. He would submit that similar issue came up before the Tribunal in the case of Sujan Industries [2007 (220) ELT 161] and it was held that exemption needs to be extended to appellant therein. 5. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand submits that benefit of Notification No. 63/95 is very specific and it exempts goods have manufactured by specific units for supply to Ministry of Defence for official purposes. He would submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986), subject to the conditions, if any, specified in the corresponding entry in column (3) of the said Table, from the whole of- (i) the duty of excise leviable thereon which is specified in the said Schedule; and (ii) the additional duty of excise leviable under the second mentioned Act on goods specified against S. No. 1 of the said Table: Provided that nothing contained in this notification shall apply to goods specified against S. No. 16 of the said Table on or after the 1 st day of April, 2000. Table S.No. Description of goods Conditions (1) (2) (3) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reof only to manufacture of goods, inter alia, BEL for supply to Ministry of Defence for official purposes. There is no extension of this benefit to vendors or job workers. The appellant s argument that they started availing exemption after clarification by a departmental officer will not help their case. An erroneous clarification cannot be taken shelter of to claim erroneous benefit. Interestingly the appellant has also produced a letter dated 27.10.2009 from the Board of Chief Commissioner, LTU, Bangalore clarifying that vendors would not be covered by the notification. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that appellants are not entitled to the benefit of exemption under the Notification 63/95. Hence on merits the appellants do n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
