TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 811
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8/1995 to different contractors for the projects financed by Asian Development Bank. During the course of audit, it was found that the appellant has cleared these machines i.e. Excavator Loaders and Earthmoving Machinery to the contractors and not supplied to the Project Implementing Authority. After completion of the projects, the said machines remained with the contractors, therefore, the appellant is not entitled for benefit of Notification No. 108/95 ibid. In these set of facts, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant to deny the benefit of Exemption Notification No. 108/95. Consequently, to demand duty along with interest and to impose penalty on the appellant. The matter was adjudicated wherein the adjudicating authority held ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fication have been satisfied by the appellants, therefore, the appellant is entitled for benefit of the above Notification. Merely, on the ground that the goods have been supplied to the contractor directly who has executed the project in question and after the implementation of the products the machine shall remain with the property of the contractor cannot be reasons to deny the benefit of notification as held by this tribunal in the case of Caterpillar India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein this Tribunal has observed as under: 3. It is not the case of the department that the goods have not been supplied to the projects financed by international organisations. The goods were supplied to various sub contractors for the Golden Quadrilater....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder: 6. considering that the goods had admittedly been used in the project and after the completion of the projects, the goods supplied to the various sub contractors were entrusted to retain the goods supplied could not stand in the way of granting, the exemption under the Notification. 8. We do not find any justifiable ground to interfere with the order of the Cestat based on a factual finding and there was no material placed by the Revenue on the allegations of the possible misuse of the goods for unintended purposes by the sub contractors. Secondly, being the beneficial Notification issued in public interest and the project itself being executed fully by the contractors as per the directions of the project implementin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xcise leviable thereon under section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (1 of 1944); and (ii) The additional duty of excise leviable thereon under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 (58 of 1957): Thus with all the conditions satisfied, the beneficial Notification applies to the case on hand. In the circumstances, we do not find any justification to introduce any condition or read in a restrictive manner. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal fails and hence, the same is dismissed. No costs. 11. We also find that the Adjudicating Authority has relied on the explanation to Notification No.13/2008 dated 01.03.2008. As all the clearance by ....