AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1562
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ring them to one of the buyers M/s.Harinam Enterprises, Jagadhari intended for use in utensils and handicrafts. An investigation was conducted at M/s.Harinam Enterprises and thereafter search was conducted at the end of the buyer of M/s.Harinam Enterprises who stated that the goods sold by M/s. Harinam Enterprises were not used as utensils and handicrafts but in fact is brass sieve test equipments and parts thereof which were used in testing of soils and chemicals. In these set of facts, it was alleged that the benefit of Notification No.05/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006 is not available to the appellant as per Sl.No.42 of the said notification, the concessional rate of duty which is available only if the sheets in question are intended for use in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot used for manufacture of utensils and handicrafts, the same have been used as equipments for industries. Therefore, the benefit of Notification No.05/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. The facts which are not in dispute as the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of brass sheet and circles and the same has been cleared by the appellant by availing the benefit of Notification No.05/2006-CE dated 1.3.2006 at concessional rate of duty. The benefit of the notification is available if the goods sold by them are intended for use in the manufacture of handicrafts and utensils. The same is also coming out from the invoices issued by the appellant and further the buyer has given certificate/und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter or heading or subheading or tariff item of the First Schedule Description of excisable goods Rate Condition No. 42. 7409 Trimmed or untrimmed sheets or circles of copper, intended for use in the manufacture of handicrafts or utensils Rs. 3500 per metric tonne 12 and 13 7. On going through the said notification, the only condition is to be complied with by the appellant that the goods sold by them and to be intended for use in the manufacture of utensils and handicrafts. Admittedly, as per the invoices issued by the appellant as well as their buyer, the intention is very much clear that the said goods were to be used for manufacture of utensils/handicrafts. The intended use of the said goods has been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....equires them to do so. If the Government intended to require the production of end use certificates, such condition would have been a part of the notification as the same is in number of so many other notification. Such insistence and in any case rejection of certificates produced by the customers on flimsy ground reflects upon the intention of the lower authorities to confirm the demand, which cannot be appreciated. 8. We also find that in the case Sha Harakchand Dharmaji (supra), this Tribunal has observed as under: 4. We have considered the submissions made before us by both the sides. It is now seen that the exemption notification gives the benefit among other items to the goods which are imported into India in respect of PV....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al use. In the decision cited by the learned Counsel viz., 1988 (14) ECR 292, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Para 10 has held as follows : 10. We are unable to accept the submission of Mr. Bana that, in order to get the exemption it must be shown that the goods in question, namely, the cement supplied by the assessee in this case was actually used in the generation or distribution of electrical energy. It must be noted that the important words used in the relevant provisions are goods for use by it in the generation or distribution of such energy (emphasis supplied by us). On a plain reading of the relevant clause it is clear that the expression for use must mean intended for use . If the intention of the legislature was to limit the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imported for use in the leather industry. It has been shown that the substance imported has use in leather industry as a penetrator. Proof of actual use is not a condition attached to the exemption. If it were so, the notification would have provided for execution of a bond obliging the importer to produce proof of actual use as in the case of many other notifications. We, therefore, do not agree with the Revenue s contention that the benefit of exemption would not be available to the appellants since they are not engaged in the leather industry but are stockists for sale. A perusal of the above decision goes to show that the burden of actual use is not a condition attached to the exemption, as otherwise the notification would have....