TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 74/93-CE was available to goods manufactured by the State Electricity Board, and whether the matter required remand for consideration of other issues including limitation.
Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the controversy was already covered by the Larger Bench decision holding that a State Electricity Board is not a Government department, and that the notification benefit was available only to goods manufactured in a factory belonging to the State Government intended for use by a Government department. In view of that binding view, the Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority had not examined the matter afresh on all relevant aspects, including limitation.
Conclusion: The notification benefit was not available to the goods manufactured by the State Electricity Board, and the matter was required to be reconsidered by the adjudicating authority afresh.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the proceedings were remanded for fresh decision after granting an opportunity to the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: A State Electricity Board is not a Government department for the purpose of the exemption, and entitlement under the notification depends on manufacture in a State Government factory for Government departmental use.
TaxTMI 
