TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 1018
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing their factory at Yamunnagar who manufacture boilers for Biomass Energy Producing Systems and supplied to various customers. During the period of dispute, which is from January, 2002 to February, 2003, the appellant were availing full duty exemption under Notification No.6/02-CE dated 1.3.2002, Sl.N0.237 List 9(16). Sl.N0.237 in the said notification, prescribes nil rate of duty for non-conventional Energy Devices/Systems specified in List 9 of the notification. List 9 covers "Agriculture/Forestry, agro industrial, industrial, municipal and urban waste conversion devices producing energy". In the list No.9, Sl. No. 21 covers, parts consumed within the factory of production of such parts for manufacture of goods specified at Sl. Nos. 1 to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or manufacture of Biomass Energy Producing Systems. Since in the instant case parts of the Biomass Energy Producing Systems are not used within the factory where the same are produced, they are not covered by Sl.No21 of the List 9 and since the goods are only parts, not complete energy producing system, the same are also not covered by Sl.No.16 of the List 9. He relied on the following the judgement in his favour: (i) CCE, Chennai Vs. Binny Limited-2001 (136) ELT 1337 (Tri.-Chennai) (ii) Binny Limited Vs. CCE, Chennai-2006 (197) ELT 334 (SC) (iii) GERB vibration Control Systems (P) Limited Vs. CCE, Bangalore-2008 (223) ELT 390 (Tri.-Bang.) 3. Learned Advocate submitted that they had supplied various equipment to the end user but for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CE, Ludhiana-2005 (179) ELT 351 (Tri.-Del.) (vii) Bhilwara Synthetics Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur-2002 (143) ELT 22 (SC) (viii) Two Brothers Filaments Ltd. Vs. CCE, Noida-2004 (164) ELT 56 (Tri.-Del.) (ix) Vinir Engineering Pvt.Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bangalore-2004 (168) ELT 34 (Tri.-Bang.) (x) CCE, Delhi-IV Vs. Rachitech Engineers Pvt.Ltd.-2015 (326) ELT 377 (Tri.-Del.) (xi) Shree Venkateswara Engg. Corporation Vs. CCE, Coimbatore-2016 (335) ELT 62 (Tri.-Chennai) (xii) M/s.Reed Medway Packaging Co.of India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-IV(Final Order No31/2017 dt..30.3.2017) 5. Heard the parties and perused the records. 6. The exemption Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. (Sl. No. 237) prescribes nil rate of duty for "non-conventional energy devices/syst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C.E. (Sl. No. 237). 8. As the scope of entry against S. No. 237 "non-conventional energy device/systems specified in List 9" is confined by what is mentioned in List 9, there is no scope for interpreting the word device in this entry so as to cover parts of non-conventional energy system within this entry. By no stretch of imagination, parts can be termed as a conversion "device" producing energy. Hence, these are not covered in Sr. No. 16 of List 9 of the notification. In List 9, since S. No. 21 cover parts, the parts of non-conventional energy systems would not be covered by S. Nos. 1 to 20 of the List 9. But S. No. 21 covers only those parts which are captively used in manufacture of complete conventional energy systems. Therefore, in o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tained by pumping system and the bacteria as added at the commencement of the project is the cause for action inside the tank. There is no dispute on the question that the digester comes into existence at the site when it is placed on civil construction carried out at the site. To claim exemption under the exemption notification, the appellant has to either manufacture biogas plant or biogas engine as per Entry 14 or parts therefore which are consumed within the factory. The appellant is neither manufacturing biogas plants nor using the manufactured parts used for the manufacture of biogas plants within the factory premises." 10. The ratio of the above judgment is squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case. As the appellant is n....