9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 995X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods supplied by the appellant to their plant at Savli related solely to supplies with respect to DMRC contract. The questions have not been answered in the appeal memorandum or in the synopsis, it is required to remand the matter back to the original adjudicating authority to give an opportunity to appellant to clarify this aspect. The appellant are liberty to submit all the evidences in support of the claim that the all goods supplied by them were indeed in the nature of supplies made for the fulfilment of the contract obtained from DMRC under International Competitive Bidding from their other factory. If such evidence is produced, the benefit of Rule 6 (6) of the CCR will be extended to the appellant. Appeal allowed by way of remand for fresh adjudication. - HON'BLE MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) , MR. RAMESH NAIR And HON'BLE MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) , MR. RAJU Shri. Saurabh Dixit , Advocate for the Appellant Shri Tara Prakash , Deputy Commissioner ( AR ) for the Respondent ORDER RAJU This appeal has been field by Bombardier Transportation India Ltd. against denial of Cenvat Credit availed by them. 2. The appellants are sub-contractors manufacturing electric locomotives parts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icate issued by DMRC under Sr. No. 90 of Notification no. 6/2006-CE, the benefit of Sub-Rule (6) of Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 read with Sr. No 91 of Notification 6/2006-CE cannot be denied to the appellant. He argued that if benefit is available under two different categories of the Notification, failure in one category cannot result ineligibility in the other category. He relied on the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the Share Medical Care V/s. UOI-2007 (209) ELT 321 (SC.) and in case of HCL Ltd. V/s. CCE-2001 (130) ELT 405 (SC). He further pointed out that under the similar circumstances, where supplies have been made by a sub-contractor through the main contractor in respect of contracts obtained through ICB, it has been held that embargo under Rule 6 of CCR, 2004 is not applicable. He relied on the following decisions:- a. Sangam Structurals Ltd. 2018(9) TMI 1425- CESTAT ALLAHABAD b. BHEL 2015(7) TMI 225- CESTAT NEW DELHI c. Alstom T D (India) Ltd. 2016(6) TMI 663-CESTAT CHENNAI d. SCHWING STETTER (1) PVT. LTD. 2018 (364) E.L.T. 653 (Tri. - Chennai) e. K.E.I. INDUSTRIES LTD2016 (338) E.L.T. 618 (Tri. - Del.) 2.3. He further argued that the issue is of interpretation of law and ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the documents as well statement dated 05.02.2010 of Shri H.C. shah (sr. no. viii), wherein he inter alia admitted that they had also procured some of the inputs on their own on payment of duty but they had not declared such procurement to the Mis. DMRC regarding these inputs which had been used in the manufacture of trains under Contract RS2 ; that at the time of procuring such duty paid inputs, such inputs were originally intended to be used in the manufacture of their own final Products and hence they had neither informed M/s. DMRC about such purchases nor obtained the exemption certificate from M/s. DMRC for such purchase; they had taken the Cenvut credit on the same, but thereafter, without informing M/s. DMRC they had used the same i.e., cenvated inputs, in the manufacture of excisable goods intended for DMRC Project Also, Shri H.C. Shah in his statement dated 13.10.2009 has inter alia admitted that since they were also manufacturing similar excisable goods on their own account after availing the Cenvat Credit on the inputs and the finished excisable goods manufactured there-from were exported to Germany for being used in manufacture Metro Rail coaches, the duty-paid inputs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation has to be interpreted in the light of the words employed by it and not on any other basis. This was so held in the context of the principle that in a taxing statute, there is no room for any intendment, that regard must be had to the clear meaning of the words and that the matter of the should be governed wholly by the language of the notification, le., by the plain terms (xvii). exemption. (xviii). 23. Of course, some of the provisions of an exemption notification may be directory in nature and some are of mandatory in nature. A distinction between provisions of statute which are of substantive character and were built in with certain specific objectives of policy, on the one hand, and those which are merely procedural and technical in their nature, on the other, must be kept clearly distinguished. In Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (supra), this Court held that the principles as regard construction of an exemption notification are no longer res Integra; whereas the eligibility clause in relation to an exemption notification is given strict meaning where for the notification has to be interpreted in terms of its language, once an assessee satisfies the eligibility clause, the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
