https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125263 Naphtha supplied to NTPC, Kayamkulam remained eligible for exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. because the notification specifically identified that power plant as the intended recipient. Although the certificate referred to a capacity of 359.577 MW instead of the 350 MW stated in the notification, CESTAT found that there was only one NTPC power plant at Kayamkulam and that the variation in stated capacity did not mean a different plant had been covered. The discrepancy was therefore not fatal to the exemption, and the Revenue's objection was rejected. en-us Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:29:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125263 Naphtha supplied to NTPC, Kayamkulam remained eligible for exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. because the notification specifically identified that power plant as the intended recipient. Although the certificate referred to a capacity of 359.577 MW instead of the 350 MW stated in the notification, CESTAT found that there was only one NTPC power plant at Kayamkulam and that the variation in stated capacity did not mean a different plant had been covered. The discrepancy was therefore not fatal to the exemption, and the Revenue's objection was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125263