2018 (9) TMI 1425

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6% Adv. at the material time and the appellants were also availing cenvat credit facility under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In the course of visit to the unit of the appellant, it was observed by the Central Excise Officers that the appellants were supplying their products to ABB Ltd. to be utilized in the project work undertaken by the said ABB Ltd. for Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC). It was also revealed that the appellants were clearing their final products for home consumption partly on payment of duty and partly without payment of duty while claiming benefit of exemption Notification No.6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 as amended. Consequently, show cause notice dated 17.09.2008 came to be issued to the appellants and the same w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant has submitted that the Lower Authorities have held that Notification No.21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002 has no application as the subject goods are not imported. According to the learned advocate if the said contention of the Revenue is adopted, the same would render the provisions of Rule 6(6)(vii) redundant and otiose as no manufacture in India would be able to fulfill its conditions. 3. We find that an identical issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. reported as 2015 (329) ELT 893 (Tri.-Del.). It was observed that the Department's contention that Clause (vii) of Rule 6(6) would not be applicable to goods manufactured in India and would be ap....