TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee, as a sub-contractor supplying goods for ultra mega power projects, was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE despite not itself participating in the bidding process, and whether the matter required fresh verification of the requisite project certificates.
Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE was found not to require the supplier itself to be a participant in the tariff based competitive bidding process. The relevant conditions were that the power project must have been tied up through such bidding, the Central Electricity Authority must certify that the goods were required for the project, and the project CEO must furnish the undertaking. The record indicated that these requirements were substantially satisfied, and prior Tribunal decisions had held that a sub-contractor whose name appears in the awarded contract can also claim the benefit if the contract itself was awarded through the prescribed bidding process. At the same time, the certificates said to support the claim had not been examined by the lower authorities.
Conclusion: The assessee could not be denied exemption merely because it acted as a sub-contractor, but the claim required fresh verification of the supporting certificates by the adjudicating authority.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
