9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounts of the assessee for the period from October, 2015 to September, 2016, it was noticed that the assessee had manufactured and supplied 197 Control Valves to Mega Power Projects against International Competitive Bidding without payment of Excise Duty by availing exemption under Sl. No. 336 read with Condition No. 41 of Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012. 1.3 A Show Cause Notice dated 01.08.2017 was issued seeking to demand duty on industrial valves captively consumed under Notification No. 67/95-CE on the ground that clearances to Mega Power Project is not provided as an exemption in the proviso to the Notification No. 67/95-CE. The lower adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 06/2017 dated 14.12.2017 confirmed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter is covered by a gamut of decisions of the Tribunal. 4.2 In Bharat Aluminium Co.Ltd. Vs CCE Raipur - 2017 (345) ELT 685 (Tri.-Del.), the Tribunal inter alia held as under : "3. The ld. AR submitted that the exemption for the final product itself has not been categorically established. In such situation, the applicability of proviso in Notification No. 67/95-C.E. cannot be automatically made. However, we note that the original authority discussed extensively the applicability of sub-rules (1), (2) and (3) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 and there is no mention or discussion regarding appellant's eligibility of exemption on final product. What is sought to be denied is the exemption under Notification No. 67/95 for intermediate goods and no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... We have already held that the assessee did not have any liability under sub-rules (1) to (4) of Rule 6 inasmuch as these sub-rules were not applicable, by virtue of sub-rule (6), to the assessee who were clearing their exempted final products against international competitive bidding in terms of Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. ibid. In other words, a conjoint reading of sub-rule (6) of Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and clause (vi) under the proviso to Notification No. 67/95-C.E. ibid would show that the assessee's claim for exemption from payment of duty on copper wire under the Notification was not hit by the opening portion of the proviso to the Notification." 4.4 A recent Tribunal decision in Kei Industries Ltd. Vs CCE Alwar - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
