2003 (1) TMI 199

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 150 of Notification No. 11/97-Cus. Sl. No. 150 granted exemption to machinery or equipment specified in List 10 to Notification No. 11/97-Cus. required for textile industry. Sl. No. 30 of List 10 covered the following : "Effluent Treatment Unit with automatic sensing devices, automatic controller chemical dozing air flotation (DAF), reverse osmosis, sludge dewatering, decanters, ultra filters, vacuum filters to deliver water for reuse." (3)        According to the appellants, the equipment imported by them is covered in Sl. No. 30 of List 10 of Notification No. 11/97-Cus., the benefit of exemption is available to them. (4)        The lower authorities have held ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... under this Sl. No. is available subject to following the procedure prescribed in Customs (Import of goods at concessional rate of duty for manufacture of excisable goods) Rule, 1996. There is no dispute that the goods were installed in the appellants factory in the effluent treatment unit/plant. Further non-following of procedure cannot be ground to deny the benefit of Sl. No. 151 inasmuch as the appellants have complied with the requirement of these 1996 rules otherwise. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Thermax Ltd. - 1992 (61) E.L.T. 352 (SC). 2.Shri Ishwar Singh, learned J.D.R. appearing for Revenue supports the orders passed by the lower authorities. 3.After hearing rival submissions and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....some entries like Sr. No. 119. Therefore, the scheme of the notfn. has not left any scope for adding 'or' in place of commas in the entry of Sr. No. 30. Further I notice that if at all any scope or any debate is left further, the same is sealed by Sr. No. 25 of list 10 which reads as follows :- "Effluent treatment unit with bio-paq reactor, activated sledge process, activated carbon, ultra filtrations ozonisation facilites". Thus there are 2 entries for 'Effluent treatment unit', those at Sr. Nos. 25 and 30 (Which the appellant is invoking). If the contention of the appellants were correct all the devices or systems/sub-systems components of the 'Effluent treatment unit' should have been shown under one and the same Sr. No. by inserting ....