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 appellant was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 10/97-CE dated 01.03.1997 for cranes, hoists and lifting equipment supplied to specified research institutions on production of the required certificate from the competent authority.
Analysis: The exemption notification covered scientific and technical instruments, apparatus and equipment supplied to the institutions named in the notification, subject to satisfaction of the prescribed conditions. The appellant had produced the certificate from the Regional Director of BARC/CAT showing that the goods were supplied for research purposes. The same issue had already been decided in the appellant's own case for a later period on the same reasoning, and the Tribunal had held that the benefit could not be denied when the requisite certificates from the competent authority were produced.
Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the exemption, and the order denying the benefit could not be sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the conditions of an exemption notification are satisfied and the prescribed certificate from the competent authority is produced, the exemption cannot be denied on the same issue for an identical supply of goods to a specified research institution.