Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 67/95 in respect of the spray pre-treatment set up assembled at the customer's factory and used there for manufacture.
Analysis: The set up was assembled from purchased components at site pursuant to a contract and was treated as capital goods falling within the exemption framework. The Tribunal followed its earlier decision applying the same notification to a similar paint shop set up and relied on the view that the benefit is not denied merely because the goods are used by another person in the factory, so long as they are manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production.
Conclusion: The assessee was held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 67/95 and the duty demand and penalty were set aside.