Exemption for wind generator parts and no extended limitation where classification and exemption claims were disclosed.

Tower and lattice mast materials used in wind operated electricity generators were treated as eligible parts for exemption under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E., because the tower was necessary for the generator's operation and fell within the composite understanding of its parts. The omission of a separate reference to wind mill parts in the notification did not defeat the exemption where the goods were otherwise covered. On limitation, disclosure of the classification lists and exemption claim negatived suppression or intent to evade duty, so the extended period under the Central Excise law could not be invoked. The duty demand and personal penalties were set aside.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether tower and lattice mast materials cleared by the assessee were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. as parts of wind operated electricity generators; (ii) Whether the demand was barred by limitation and the extended period under the Central Excise law could be invoked.

Issue (i): Whether tower and lattice mast materials cleared by the assessee were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E. as parts of wind operated electricity generators.

Analysis: The exemption in the later notification covered wind operated electricity generators, their components and parts. The tower material was necessary for the operation of the wind operated electricity generator and the technical nature of such generator includes the tower as one of its parts. A prior Tribunal decision recognising the tower as part of a wind operated electricity generator was treated as applicable. The omission of the separate expression "wind mill and parts thereof" from the later notification did not alter the position where the goods in question were otherwise covered as parts of the wind operated electricity generator.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the exemption under Notification No. 6/2000-C.E.

Issue (ii): Whether the demand was barred by limitation and the extended period under the Central Excise law could be invoked.

Analysis: The assessee had filed classification lists and disclosed the nature of the goods and the claim to exemption. Mere claiming of an exemption could not by itself amount to suppression or misstatement. The material on which the notice was founded was available from the assessee's own records, and there was no basis to infer suppression with intent to evade duty so as to justify invocation of the longer limitation period under the proviso to Section 11A.

Conclusion: The demand was time-barred and the extended period could not be invoked.

Final Conclusion: The demand of duty and the personal penalties were set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the goods cleared are established to be parts of wind operated electricity generators, exemption cannot be denied merely because the notification does not separately enumerate wind mill parts, and disclosure of the classification claim negatives suppression for purposes of extended limitation.

---