9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 1449X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing to approved projects by availing the benefit of the Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012 at nil rate of duty. The department has alleged that during the period from June- 2012 to June-2017, the Appellant have removed finished goods from their factory without payment of duty on which they were liable to reverse an amount @ 6% of the value of exempted goods in terms of Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as they did not fulfil the conditions of the said Notification. The department has issued SCN dated 22.01.2016 covering the period from January-2012 to March-2015 demanding an amount of Rs. 37,57,424/- alongwith interest and penalty. Subsequently, they issued statement of computation dated 11.04.2016 for the period from April-2015 to January-2016 demanding an amount of Rs. 45,33,440/- and another statement of computation dated 08.09.2017 for the period from February-2016 to June-2017 demanding an amount of Rs. 34,95,660/-. The Learned adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 1,17,86,524/- against the Appellant along with interest and penalty. The appellant also did not succeed before the Commissioner (Appeals) where their appeals were rejected. Hence, thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as Mega Power Project by an officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary to the Government of India in Ministry of Power. The projects to whom they have supplied electrical power cables, are Mega Power Project. He referred to the decision in the case of M/s Kent Introl Pvt. Ltd Vs. CCE Nasik- 2014 (301) ELT 84 (Tri.-Mumbai) which was confirmed by Hon'ble Mumbai High Court vide 2016 (331) ELT 77 (Bombay). Additionally, he referred to the following Judgments: - * CCE, Meerut- I V/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.- 2015(329) ELT 893 (Tri.-Del.) * Unique Industrial Handlers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Nasik, reported in 2016 (333) E.L.T. 311 (Tri. Mumbai) * Ramsarup Utpadak, Unit-II Vs. CCE, Kolkata-III reported in 2012 (283) E.L.T. 425 (Tri. Kolkata), * Sangam Structurals Ltd. V/s. CCE, Allahabad- 2018(9) TMI 1425- CESTAT Allahabad * Andhra Cements Ltd. V/s. CCE, Guntur- 2016(7) TMI 650-CESTAT Hyderabad * Rallison Electricals Pvt.Ltd. V/s. CCE, Jaipur-1- 2016(342) ELT 292(Tri.-Del.) * CCE & ST, Alwar V/s. Rallison Electricals Pvt.Ltd.- 2018(359) ELT 139 (Raj.) 3.2 The Learned Advocate also referred to CBEC Circular No. 334/8/2016-TRU dated 29.02.2016 which clarifies that when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said Table and subject to the relevant conditions annexed to this notification, if any, specified in the corresponding entry in column (5) of the Table aforesaid Table S. No. Chapter or heading or sub- heading or tariff item Description of goods Rate Condition No. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 336 Any Chapter All goods supplied against International Competitive Bidding. Nil 41 338 Any Chapter All items of machinery, including prime movers, instruments, apparatus and appliances, control gear and transmission equipments, power cables used within the power generation plant, auxiliary equipment (including those required for research and development purposes, testing and quality control), as well as all components (whether finished or not) or raw materials for the manufacture of aforesaid items and their components, supplied to mega power projects from which the supply of power has been tied up through tariff based competitive bidding or a mega power project awarded to a developer on the basis of such bidding. Explanation.- For the removal of doubts, it is clarified that goods required for setting up of "mega power project" include the goods required for development of facil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only in the said project and not for any other use; and (ii) in the event viable compliance of sub-clause (i), the project developer will pay the duty which would have been leviable at the time of clearance of goods, but for this exemption." 5.3 As neither the Show Cause Notices nor the orders of the lower authorities dispute clearance of electrical power cables by the Appellant at Nil rate of duty, hence these conditions do not require further elaboration. 5.4 As regards reversal of an amount equal to 6% of the value of exempt goods on account of use of common inputs Rule 6(6) (vii) of the CCR, 2004 provides that Sub-Rule (1), (2), (3) and (4) shall not be applicable in case the excisable goods removed without payment of duty are either ......................... "[(vii) all goods which are exempt from the duties of customs leviable under the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) and the additional duty leviable under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Customs Tariff Act when imported into India and are supplied, - (a) against International Competitive Bidding; or (b) to a power project from which power supply has been tied up through tariff b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ow the rank of Joint Secretary to the Government of India in the Ministry of Power is provisional, the importer furnishes a security in the form of a Fixed deposit Receipt from any Scheduled Bank for a term of thirty six months or more in the name of the President of India for an amount equal to the duty of customs payable on such imports but for this exemption, to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, at the time of importation and if the importer fails to furnish the final mega power status certificate within a period of thirty six months from the date of importation, the said security shall be appropriated towards duty of customs payable on such imports but for this exemption. (b) In the case of imports by a Central Public Sector Undertaking, the quantity, total value, description and specifications of the imported goods are certified by the Chairman and Managing Director of the said Central Public Sector Undertaking; and (c) In the case of imports by a Private Sector Project, the quantity, total value, description and specifications of the imported goods are certified by the Chief Executive Officer of such project." 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant except for the classification in column 2 of Entry No. 400 in Customs Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. As clearly noted, the classification [Heading] 9801 is not available in Central Excise Tariff and the same relates to project import, as such the denial of exemption on this grounds is legally not sustainable. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal." 5.7 The same issue was again considered by the Tribunal in the case of Rallison Electricals Pvt. Ltd. V/s. CCE, Jaipur-I - 2016 (342) ELT 292 (Tri.-Del.) which was also upheld by Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court vide 2018 (359) ELT 139 (Raj.) dated 27.07.2017. Para 7 of the said order is reproduced below:- "7. The impugned order confirms the denial of exemption of duty of Central Excise saying that conditions of Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. (supra) have not been fulfilled. Commissioner, Central Excise in the impugned order inter alia says that subject goods are not classifiable under Chapter Heading 9801 of Customs Tariff and required certificate has not been issued by CMD of NTPC. 7.1 The facts are that the appellant have supplied the goods against International Competitive Bidding [reference to Sr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
