Exemption under excise notification cannot be denied for customs-heading mismatch where substantive conditions are satisfied.

Exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. was held unavailable to be denied merely because the goods were described as Heading 9801 in a customs notification, since that heading relates to project imports under the customs regime and has no corresponding entry in the Central Excise Tariff. The goods were manufactured for a water treatment plant project and the substantive conditions of the exemption were substantially satisfied. The mismatch in customs classification could not override the excise notification, so the denial of exemption was not sustainable and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 6/2006-C.E.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. despite denial on the ground that the goods were described under Heading 9801 in the customs notification, a heading not available in the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The goods were manufactured for a water treatment plant project and the conditions of the exemption notification were substantially satisfied. The denial was based only on the classification reference in the customs notification. The applicable heading 9801 pertains to project imports under the customs regime and has no corresponding entry in the Central Excise Tariff. Following the earlier consistent view in similar cases, the mismatch in classification under the customs notification could not be used to defeat the exemption otherwise available under the excise notification.

Conclusion: The denial of exemption was not sustainable and the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 6/2006-C.E.

---