Tribunal remands case for proof of supply to UNICEF project under duty exemption rule

The Tribunal remanded the case to the Original Authority, allowing the appellant to provide documentary evidence proving the goods were supplied for the UNICEF project by either the appellant or another company. The appellant's eligibility for duty exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. hinged on substantiating the supply for the project, emphasizing the need for conclusive proof to support the claim.

---

---

Issues:
Dispute over duty exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. for supply to UN and international organizations for projects.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals), Indore regarding the clearance of three Vehicles without duty payment under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing "Body of Motor Vehicles," claimed exemption for goods supplied to UN and international organizations. However, authorities held the appellant ineligible as the certificates were issued in favor of another company, M/s. Eicher Motors Ltd., not the appellant. The appellant argued the goods were manufactured on a job work basis for M/s. Eicher Motors Ltd., who supplied them to UNICEF.

During the hearing, the appellant's counsel presented certificates issued by UNICEF covering the cleared goods. The counsel argued that since the certificates covered the goods and there was no dispute, the duty exemption should apply, citing relevant Tribunal decisions. The Departmental Representative reiterated the impugned order.

Upon reviewing the UNICEF certificates, it was noted that although they covered the cleared goods, they were issued in favor of M/s. Eicher Motors Ltd. The appellant claimed to have supplied the goods to M/s. Eicher Motors Ltd., who then supplied them to UNICEF. The Tribunal found the need for documentary proof showing the goods were indeed supplied for the UNICEF project by either the appellant or M/s. Eicher Motors Ltd. The appellant's counsel expressed readiness to provide such evidence.

Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant could avail the exemption if documentary evidence was furnished proving the goods were supplied for the UNICEF project by either party. The issue was remanded to the Original Authority for further consideration, allowing the submission of evidence as per law.

---