2002 (4) TMI 761 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Admissibility of Modvat credit on specific items - Sapcocant 2222, SU 853, P3 Laboknar, S Pride 30, S Pride 40, MS HSP 68, SU 860, SU 120, Epoxy-Thinner.

Analysis:
The judgment concerns six appeals filed by the Revenue regarding the admissibility of Modvat credit on certain items. In the absence of representation from the Respondents, the tribunal proceeded with the case. The first six items, lubricant oils and greases, were found not sustainable based on a previous decision by the Tribunal. However, items SU 860 and SU 120, identified as cleaning agents, were contested. While a prior decision favored the Department, a recent judgment ruled in favor of the admissibility of similar items as eligible inputs for Modvat credit. The tribunal referred to various precedents, including the case of Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Excise, Coimbatore, to support the decision that these items are eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Despite the argument that these items were not used in the manufacturing of final products, the tribunal upheld their eligibility based on established precedents.

Regarding the item Epoxy-Thinner, it was argued that a previous tribunal decision deemed it ineligible for Modvat credit. The tribunal, following the precedent set by Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of C. Excise, Belgaum, concluded that the Epoxy-Thinner is not an eligible input for availing Modvat credit. In summary, the tribunal held that the first six items, as well as items SU 860 and SU 120, are eligible inputs for Modvat credit, while the Epoxy-Thinner is not eligible based on the existing legal framework. The judgment was based on a thorough analysis of relevant precedents and legal provisions, ensuring consistency with previous decisions while determining the admissibility of Modvat credit for the specific items in question.