2017 (9) TMI 1205 - AT - Customs

Tribunal grants exemption under Notification no. 30/2004-CE, emphasizing compliance with conditions.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals, extending exemption under Notification no.30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 to the appellants. Relying on the principles from ... Benefit of N/N. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 - denial on the ground that the condition provided in the proviso has not been complied, inasmuch as the goods were not produced or manufactured in India - Held that: - in the appellant’s own case, M/s Artex Textile Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs New Delhi [2016 (11) TMI 1456 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], the Tribunal has extended the benefit of notification dated 9.7.2004 by relying on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SRF Ltd. [2015 (4) TMI 561 - SUPREME COURT], where it was held that appellants were entitled to exemption from payment of CVD in terms of N/N. 6/02 - the benefit of N/N. 30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 should be available to the appellants - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues involved:1. Denial of exemption under Notification no.30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 due to non-compliance with conditions.2. Interpretation of the conditions of the notification in light of judicial precedents.3. Applicability of the principles established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SRF Ltd. case to the present appeals.Issue 1: The denial of exemption under Notification no.30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 was based on the condition that no cenvat credit should have been availed in respect of duties paid on inputs. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) held that this condition was not met as the goods were not produced or manufactured in India.Issue 2: The appellant argued that a previous Tribunal order had allowed the appeal with consequential benefit, and urged that the present appeals should be decided similarly. The Revenue, however, contended that the conditions of the notification had not been complied with, citing a judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in a specific case.Issue 3: The Tribunal noted that in the appellant's previous case, the benefit of the same notification had been extended based on a Supreme Court judgment in the SRF Ltd. case. Despite the Revenue's objections, the Tribunal found that the principles established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the SRF Ltd. case were applicable to the present appeals for availing the benefits of the notification no.30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004.The Tribunal carefully analyzed the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case cited by the Revenue, which emphasized the conditions stipulated in exemption notifications. The Tribunal observed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the SRF Ltd. case, reaffirmed in a subsequent review petition, should govern the present appeals. As the imports by the appellants predated an amendment to the notification, the Tribunal held that the benefits under the original notification should be available to the appellants. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the exemption under the notification no.30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2004 was extended to the appellants, allowing the appeals in their favor with any consequential relief as per law.