International Competitive Bidding exemption extends to sub-contractors supplying goods under the awarded project contract.

Exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-CE, as amended, was available where excisable goods were supplied against an International Competitive Bidding contract. The text did not require the supplier claiming the benefit to be the direct bidder. Where the main contractor had participated in the bidding, the project was a mega power project, and the goods were supplied through the contractual chain for that project, the exemption could not be denied merely because the manufacturer was a sub-contractor. Earlier Tribunal decisions on identical facts supported this construction, and denial on the sole ground of non-participation in bidding was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-CE as amended by Notification No. 48/2004-CE and the successor notification could be denied to a manufacturer supplying goods as a sub-contractor merely because it had not itself participated in the International Competitive Bidding process.

Analysis: The exemption text required that the excisable goods be supplied against an International Competitive Bidding contract. It did not impose a separate condition that the supplier claiming the exemption must itself be the bidder. The record showed that the main contractor had participated in the bidding, the project had the status of a mega power project, and the goods were supplied for that project through the contractual chain. On identical facts, earlier Tribunal decisions had taken the view that a sub-contractor is not disqualified merely for not being the direct bidder, provided the supply is made against the bidding-awarded contract and the goods are used for the project.

Conclusion: Denial of the exemption on the sole ground that the appellant was not itself a participant in the bidding process was unsustainable. The appellant was entitled to the exemption.

---