2016 (7) TMI 635 - AT - Central Excise

CESTAT rules supplies for IDA projects eligible for exemption under notification

M/s. J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd. Versus C.C.E. Jaipuir-II

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that supplies made for projects financed by the International Development ... Applicability of notification no.108/95 granting exemption to the goods manufactured by the assessee who have supplied to projects approved by Government of India and financed by World Bank or any other international organization - Held that:- Both the sides agree that the issue is no more res integra and stands settled by various decisions of the Tribunal. Reference is made to the Tribunals decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Kanpur vs. Jyoti Capsules(2009 (10) TMI 746 - CESTAT NEW DELHI) as also to a latest decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur Vs Mahindra & Mahindra (2015 (9) TMI 1145 - CESTAT NEW DELHI). It was held that the supplies made for the project financed by International Development Association would earn the exemption in terms of notification no. 108/95-CE. Issues involved: Applicability of notification no.108/95 granting exemption to goods manufactured by the assessee supplied to projects approved by the Government of India and financed by World Bank or any other international organization.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi involved the interpretation of notification no.108/95 regarding the exemption granted to goods manufactured by the assessee supplied to approved projects financed by international organizations. The short issue in the appeal was the applicability of this notification to the cement supplied by the appellant to a project under the Rajasthan Water Sector Reconstructing Project, approved by the Government of India and financed by the International Development Association. The initial proceedings against the appellant questioned the eligibility for exemption as the International Development Association was not specifically mentioned in the notification. However, the original adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings after clarifications that the International Development Association is a constituent of the World Bank, thus falling under the definition of an international organization in the notification.The Revenue appealed against the original order, leading to the Commissioner (A) reversing the decision. Both parties agreed that the issue had been settled by various Tribunal decisions, including the case of Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Kanpur vs. Jyoti Capsules and Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur Vs Mahindra & Mahindra. These decisions established that supplies made for projects financed by the International Development Association would indeed qualify for the exemption under notification no. 108/95-CE. The Tribunal, following the precedent set by these decisions, found no merit in the Commissioner (A)'s order and set it aside, thereby allowing the appeal and restoring the order of the original adjudicating authority.In conclusion, the judgment clarified the interpretation of the notification and affirmed that supplies made for projects financed by the International Development Association are eligible for the exemption provided under notification no.108/95. The Tribunal's decision was based on established precedents and a clear understanding of the definition of international organizations within the context of the notification.