2003 (10) TMI 174

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icles to the Government of Karnataka, Health & Family Welfare Department for the Second State Health Systems Development Project, which was financed by an International Development Association and was approved by the Government; that they had filed a classification declaration under the provisions of Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules; that they had also addressed a communication to the Assistant Commissioner informing him about the supply of vehicles to the approved project and claimed exemption under Notification No. 108/95; that, subsequently, the matter was also discussed personally by their representative with the Assistant Commissioner; that the Commissioner, in the impugned order, has confirmed the demand of duty and imposed penal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ubmitted that the entire demand of duty is barred by limitation as the show cause notice has been issued on 9-5-2003 for demanding duty for the period from 30th March, 1999 to 30th November, 1999; that they have duly declared, in their classification declaration, that they were clearing the goods claiming exemption under Notification No. 108/95; that besides this, they addressed a communication, to this effect to the Assistant Commissioner, with whom the matter was also personally discussed; that, finally, they had produced a certificate from the Project Administrator of Karnataka Health Systems Development Project; that merely because of the fact that it was not countersigned by the Principal Secretary, the Department cannot allege that th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(55) E.L.T. 437 (S.C.)". The Tribunal in that matter has so relied upon the decision in the case of Birla Institute of Technology v. Collector of Customs, 1991 (56) E.L.T 753 (Tribunal), wherein it has been held that delay in submission of certificate will not affect the grant of exemption. Following the ratio of the said decision, we hold that the benefit of Notification cannot be denied to the appellants merely on the ground that the certificate, stipulated in the Notification, has been produced subsequently, for the clearance of the goods when it is not in dispute that the project is financed by the International Organisation and approved by the Central Government. We also agree with the learned representative of the appellant company th....