Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2016 (4) TMI 144

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e is that whether the appellant being 100% EOU/STP Unit is entitle for exemption Notification No. 1/95-CE dated 4/1/1995 and Notification No. 140/91-Cus dated 22/10/1991 in respect of goods namely Nordialite large (12 ft pole with terminal block), Methallide control gear for NP-3L, Planter up lighter and Armstrong mineral fiber sound absorbing sheets and steel angle suspended system, MS ERW pipe black steel tube for which permission has been given by the Director, STPI for procurement. 3. The Adjudicating authority denied the exemption of both the notifications and consequently confirmed the duty demand of Rs. 11,45,856/- and imposed penalty of Rs. 1 lac under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Pennar Industries Ltd[2015(322) ELT 402(S.C.)] (d) Interscapte Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore -III[2009(235) ELT 257(Tri. Bang.)] 5. Shri. Prasad Paranjape, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent submits that as per very condition which was referred in the Revenues appeal for denial of exemption clearly shows that the goods should be installed or used within the bonded premises, there is no condition of use of goods in the development of software only, therefore Revenue is wrongly interpreting the notifications. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the following judgments: (a) Axtec Software Technology Servcies Ltd. Vs. CC Bangalore [2005(189) ELT 301] (b) GE India Technology Centre Vs.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Central Excise to have been installed or otherwise used within a period of one year from the date of procurement thereof or within such extended period not exceeding five years as the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Central Excise may, on being satisfied that there is sufficient cause for not using them as above within the said period, allow; Notification No. 140/91-Cus dated 22/10/1991 (7) the importer executes a bond, in such form and for such sum and with such authority as may be prescribed by the [Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commiss....