2017 (6) TMI 44

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ment of duty amounting to Rs. 97,280/-. The Revenue sought to disallow the benefit claimed under said Notification. In the Order-in-Original dated 7.11.2001, the demand was set aside whereas the Commissioner (A) held the view that central excise duty is payable on the said goods. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present appeal has been filed. 2.   With the above background, we heard Mr. Parashiva Murthy, AR for the Revenue and none appeared on behalf of the appellant. 3.   The appellant has supplied vibration control systems to their customers M/s. Roshni Power Tech Ltd. which has been granted license from Non-Conventional Energy Development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh to set up six megawatt biomass based power p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....p;  We find that the same issue pertaining to the same appellant has come before the Tribunal in an earlier case for a different period which stands decided as reported in 2008 (223) ELT 390. We have gone through the said decision of the Tribunal, which has held as follows: "4. We heard both sides. The learned Advocate brought to our notice the decision of the Tribunal Mumbai Bench in the case of Pushpam Forging v. CCE, Raigad, 2006 (193) E.L.T. 334 (Tri.-Mumbai) wherein in the context of the same notification it was held that the benefit of the said notification cannot be denied on the ground that flanges were not consumed in the factory of production since the tower of the one wind mill being huge structure would come into existence....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be upheld. 5. On the other hand Revenue contends that in the present case, the goods are not consumed within the factory of production and they are cleared to another unit and therefore the condition of notification is not fulfilled. Revenue relied on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 474 (S.C.) wherein it was held that notification should be construed strictly and there should be no liberal construction to enlarge the terms and scope of notification. Serial No. 237 of the relevant Notification 6/2002, dated 1-3-2002 reads as follows: Sl. No. 237 : "Non-conventional energy devices/systems specified in list 9" List 9 (Item 1....