2017 (9) TMI 1205

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....atter of present dispute. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has denied the benefit of the said notification on the ground that the condition provided in the proviso has not been complied, inasmuch as the goods were not produced or manufactured in India. The condition for exemption is that no cenvat credit ought to have been availed in respect of duties paid on inputs. 2. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that in the case of the appellant itself, this Tribunal vide Final Order No.55993-56023/2016 dated 17.11.2016 has allowed the appeal with consequential benefit. Thus, he submits that the present appeals should also be decided in line with the decision of the Tribunal contained in the Order dated 17.11.2016. 3. On the other han....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sed either (i) a condition that the input used for the manufacture of the exempted goods, should have suffered a duty or (ii) a condition that duty ought to have been paid and Cenvat credit not claimed, the Court interpreted such Notifications in favour of the Revenue (except perhaps in the case of Aidek and SRF). 46. It must be pointed out at this stage that one cannot make a distinction between (i) a Notification, which merely stipulates a condition that the manufacturer ought not to have claimed Cenvat credit in respect of the duties paid on the inputs and (ii) a Notification that imposes a condition that a duty of excise should have been paid on the inputs and no Cenvat credit should have been claimed in relation to the same. This is ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unless he had shown that in the entire process of manufacture of woven silk fabrics falling under Tariff Item No.5007, there are no inputs (used directly or indirectly and whether found in the final product or not), which attract any levy of duty under tariff items relevant to those inputs. 60. Hence, in fine, the propositions of law that would emerge out of the above discussion, can be summed up as follows : (i) In cases where the exemption Notifications are absolute and they do not make the benefit available only upon the fulfillment of any condition, even the importer would be entitled to the benefit of exemption. (ii) In cases where the Notifications for exemption stipulate only one condition namely that the inputs used in the man....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d, then the benefit of the Notification will be available only if both conditions are satisfied. An importer will never be able to satisfy both these conditions and hence, he cannot claim the benefit." 7. On careful consideration of the judgement of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CC(Exports), Chennai Vs. Prashray Overseas Pvt. Ltd., as above, we find that the Honb'ble Court proceeded to decide the subject issue with the following observation:- "15. Contending that the amendment to the Notification is unconstitutional, inasmuch as it seeks to annual the effect of the decision of the Supreme Court in SRF Ltd., a batch of writ petitions have been filed before this Court. But simultaneously, the Central Government also moved a ....