TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal allows appeals for exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus.</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the order denying exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., duty demand, penalty imposition, and ... - Issues involved: Denial of exemption u/s Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., duty demand, penalty imposition, and confiscation of Rig.Summary:Denial of Exemption and Duty Demand:- The appellants appealed against the order denying exemption u/s Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., where the imported Rig was required to be used exclusively for road construction.- The impugned order alleged that the Rig was used by Delhi Metro Rail Corporation for purposes other than road construction, leading to duty demand and penalty imposition.Contentions and Submissions:- The appellants contended that the Rig was indeed used for road construction, and any testing at the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation site was solely for assessing its reusability for road construction.- The appellant provided evidence, including a log book, to support the claim that the Rig was used for testing purposes only.Revenue's Argument:- The Revenue argued that even if the Rig was used for testing, it should have been used solely for road construction to comply with the Notification's condition.- Due to the alleged violation of the Notification's condition, the Revenue opposed granting the benefit of the Notification to the appellants.Judgment and Observations:- After considering the submissions from both sides, the Tribunal observed that the Rig was used for testing purposes only, not for the actual Delhi Metro Rail Corporation project work.- The Tribunal found that the Rig's use for testing was in line with the Notification's requirement of being used for further road construction work.- Consequently, the impugned order was set aside as the appellants had complied with the conditions of Notification No. 21/2002, serial No. 230.- The appeals were allowed with any consequential relief deemed necessary.Note: The judgment was delivered by Member (J) Ashok Jindal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
