2017 (5) TMI 511

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt of duty amounting to Rs. 18,40,000/-. The Revenue sought to disallow the benefit claimed under said Notification. In the Order-in-Original dated 12.9.2003, the demand was confirmed along with penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- and the Commissioner (A) upheld the central excise duty payable on the said goods as confirmed in Order-in-Original but set aside the penalty. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present appeal has been filed. 2. With the above background, we heard Mr. Dayanand.K, learned advocate for the appellant and Shri Pakshirajan, AR for the Revenue. 3. The appellant has supplied conveyor belt systems to their customers, M/s. Kalpa-taru Power Transmission Limited, which has been granted license from Rajastan Renewable Energy Corpor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... [CCE v. Mahendra Engineering Works - 1993 (67) E.L.T. 134 followed in Bensel Industrial Corporation - 2000 (118) E.L.T. 119]. We find the flanges to be a part of WOEG. 2.2 The restriction being given to the exemption as part of the tower by reading Sr. No. 20 of lists, only on the grounds that flanges were not eligible since they were not consumed in the factory of production for the manufacture of tower has to be considered with the fact that tower of a Wind Mill being huge structures would only came into existence in the factory of manufacture as a design and in fact they would arise only in fact at site after assembly using the flanges. Consumption at site in tower is not questioned on facts nor it can be said that flange is not used ....