https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325044 Beneficial exemption under Notification No. 3/2004-CE could not be denied merely because the district authority certificate did not separately name the sub-contractor, where the supply chain, invoice records, correspondence and prior intimation to the jurisdictional excise officer showed that the cables were cleared for the specified water treatment plant project. The tribunal applied the principle that technical omissions should not defeat an exemption when the goods were actually used for the intended public project and there was no allegation of misuse. The exemption was allowed and the duty demand was held unsustainable. en-us Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Nov 2016 13:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325044 Beneficial exemption under Notification No. 3/2004-CE could not be denied merely because the district authority certificate did not separately name the sub-contractor, where the supply chain, invoice records, correspondence and prior intimation to the jurisdictional excise officer showed that the cables were cleared for the specified water treatment plant project. The tribunal applied the principle that technical omissions should not defeat an exemption when the goods were actually used for the intended public project and there was no allegation of misuse. The exemption was allowed and the duty demand was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325044