https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333849 The Tribunal ruled that buses supplied to DMRC by the main appellant did not qualify as "equipment" under Notification no.6/2006-CE, denying the appellant's claim for exemption from excise duty. However, the penalties imposed on the main appellant and the Director of DMRC were overturned due to lack of fraudulent intent, particularly considering DMRC's status as a Government Promoted Utility Organization. The main appellant's exemption claim was partly rejected, while the penalties were set aside. The Director of DMRC's appeal was fully allowed, resulting in the penalties being annulled for both parties. en-us Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Feb 2017 13:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333849 The Tribunal ruled that buses supplied to DMRC by the main appellant did not qualify as "equipment" under Notification no.6/2006-CE, denying the appellant's claim for exemption from excise duty. However, the penalties imposed on the main appellant and the Director of DMRC were overturned due to lack of fraudulent intent, particularly considering DMRC's status as a Government Promoted Utility Organization. The main appellant's exemption claim was partly rejected, while the penalties were set aside. The Director of DMRC's appeal was fully allowed, resulting in the penalties being annulled for both parties. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333849