AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 183
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te made by them. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that they had imported silver conductor paste and claim that the benefit of the Notification No. 12-2012-CE for the purpose of full of exemption of CVD. 3. The benefit of the said Notification has been denied in the impugned order holding that the silver conductor paste is a consumable item and not a part. 4. Learned counsel argues that expression "parts consumed" appearing in Notification has to be read together and interpreted in the same manner. 5. He pointed out that the impugned order relies on the AAR Himachal Pradesh order No. EXM-JCSTE/ARAPLP/2018- 19-01-04 dated 25.07.2018. He pointed out that the decisions of AAR Himachal Pradesh is for different Notific....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the impugned order. He pointed that the word "consumed" also means to "use up". He pointed out that the word "consumed" does not necessarily imply that the goods consumed need to loss their identity. He further pointed out that the Notification prescribes the condition that exemption is only to parts consumed within the factory of production for the manufacture of goods specified in this state. He pointed out that in the instant case the parts are imported and therefore the benefit of the Central Excise Notification cannot be extended to the imported goods for purpose of exemption from CVD. He pointed out that the decision relied upon by the learned counsel in the case of Solker Industries (supra) was passed at the time when the decision o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods ) Rules, 2001, is followed 11. Learned counsel for the appellant has stressed upon the word "consumed" appearing in the notification and he relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Solker Industries Limited in paragraph 4 of this decision. "4. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, we find that the Notification, in terms of S. No. 18 therein, granted full exemption from payment of duty of excise on "parts consumed within the factory of production of such parts for the manufacture of goods specified at Sl Nos. 1 to 17 above". Learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed that "the goods imported are consumed/ used in the production no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s a doubt, the benefit of doubt has go up the revenue as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dilip Kumar & Company (supra). 12. Moreover, it is seen that the Notification clearly hold that the exemption is only available if the goods are consumed within the factory of production. In the instant case the goods are imported and, therefore this condition is not satisfied. For this reason also the benefit of notifications cannot be extended. 13. It is noticed that learned Authorised Representative relied on this decision of Devilog Systems (I) Ltd. vs. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore [1997 (89) ELT (Tri.-Del.]. In the said case distinction between the "part" and consumable has been made in the following manner. "8. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....learance, and enhance the performance of the machine; their value has to be included in the assessable value of the machine. If they are not fitted at the time of clearance and are delivered separately, their value cannot be so included. The fact that the manufacturer does not manufacture the disputed item which is an integral part and imports or buys it and supplies the machine with the disputed items fitted or separately cannot make any difference. That is because the disputed item is an integral part of the machine and is supplied or arranged to be supplied by the manufacturer of the machine. This is different from genuine cases of manufacture and clearance of incomplete machines where the manufacturer has no obligation to and does not a....