Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether power cables and brake hydraulics imported for wind operated electricity generators were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 64/94 dated 01-03-1994, while earthing cables and wind farm computers were not; (ii) Whether the same goods, to the extent found exempt under Notification No. 64/94, were also entitled to additional duty exemption under Notification No. 205/88.
Issue (i): Whether power cables and brake hydraulics imported for wind operated electricity generators were eligible for exemption under Notification No. 64/94 dated 01-03-1994, while earthing cables and wind farm computers were not.
Analysis: The notification specifically covered wind turbine controller and parts thereof, brake hydraulics, and other identified parts of wind operated electricity generators. The certificate from the supplier's research centre indicated that power cables formed part of the inside cabling of the wind turbine controller, and the benefit already extended to control cables supported a similar treatment for power cables. Brake hydraulics were expressly covered and the record showed that 27 sets had already been cleared duty free, so the remaining parts could not be denied exemption in isolation. By contrast, earthing cables were only protective devices without proof of special design for the imported unit, and the technical material did not support their inclusion. The wind farm computer was found to be a centralised monitoring system for a wind farm and not a component of the wind operated electricity generator or its controller.
Conclusion: Power cables and brake hydraulics were held eligible for exemption, while earthing cables and wind farm computers were held not eligible.
Issue (ii): Whether the same goods, to the extent found exempt under Notification No. 64/94, were also entitled to additional duty exemption under Notification No. 205/88.
Analysis: The additional duty notification was not tied to tariff headings in the manner suggested by the department and covered wind mills, parts of wind mills, and specially designed devices running on wind energy. Once the goods were held to be parts of wind operated electricity generators for the principal exemption, the same reasoning applied to additional duty. The Court also noted that the excise department was extending the benefit to similar manufactured goods, and the approach in the Supreme Court precedent on exemption to parts was treated as applicable.
Conclusion: Additional duty exemption under Notification No. 205/88 was extended to the goods held eligible under Notification No. 64/94.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in part, with exemption granted for power cables and brake hydraulics and consequential additional duty relief, while the denial of exemption for earthing cables and wind farm computers was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a notification specifically covers parts of a machine, a component shown by technical evidence to form part of the machine's integral functional cabling or expressly enumerated sub-assembly is eligible for exemption, but items serving only a general protective or remote monitoring function are not; the same exemption logic extends to an additional duty notification covering parts of wind mills and wind-energy devices.