2019 (2) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r, AC (AR) for the Appellant Shri M.N. Bharathi, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench Brief facts are that the respondents are engaged in manufacture of filtration equipment falling under CETSH 84212190 of CETA, 1985. On scrutiny of records for the months of December 2007 to May 2008, it was found that they had cleared filtration equipment without payment of duty claiming exempt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oner (Appeals) vide order impugned herein observed that the respondents are eligible for exemption of the notification and set aside the demand, interest and penalties. Aggrieved, the department has come in appeal. 2. On behalf of the department, ld. AR Shri L. Nandakumar supported the grounds of appeal. 3. The ld. counsel Shri M.N. Bharathi appeared for the respondent and submitted that tho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner of Customs - 2017 (353) ELT 124 d. Toshniwal Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur - 2017 (5) GSTL 179. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The respondents have supplied the goods for water treatment plant for human consumption and the only ground for disallowing the benefit of Notification 6/2006 is that the respondents who is a sub-contractor has not participated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Competitive Bidding and it is proved that the goods were in fact supplied to such power project and the equipments were installed at the project site. What we noticed is that neither the benefits under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. (Sr. No. 400) nor the exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. (Sr. No. 91) is subject to any conditions stipulated in Foreign Trade Policy. BHEL as the main contra....