2005 (3) TMI 634 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Commissioner (Appeals) order allowing credit on parts and accessories of moulds and dies under sub-heading 8480.10 of Central Excise Tariff Act.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Challenge to Commissioner (Appeals) order

The Revenue challenged the Commissioner (Appeals) order allowing credit on parts and accessories of moulds and dies under sub-heading 8480.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The Revenue contended that Rule 57Q does not provide for allowing credit on parts and accessories of moulds and dies. The Original Authority also supported this view, stating that parts and accessories are not included in the list appended to Rule 57Q.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Rule 57Q

The Respondent argued that the moulds and dies in question fall under Heading 8480.10 and are covered by Serial No. 2 of the table under Rule 57Q. Referring to a previous case, the Respondent asserted that all goods under Chapter 84, including moulds, are covered by Serial No. 2. The Respondent further argued that since the moulds and dies used are classified under Chapter 84, they are eligible for credit under Serial No. 2 and Serial No. 6 of the table.

Issue 3: Commissioner (Appeals) findings

Upon considering the submissions, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that the moulds and dies used by the Appellant are under Chapter sub-heading 8480.10 of the Central Excise Tariff. The Commissioner concluded that all types of moulds and dies, regardless of their chapter classification, are eligible capital goods for Modvat credit under Serial No. 6 of the table. Additionally, the Commissioner determined that the parts and accessories of moulds under Chapter 84 are covered under Serial No. 5 of the table. Therefore, the Commissioner held that the parts and accessories of moulds under sub-heading 8480.10 used by the Appellant are eligible for coverage under Serial No. 5 of the table to Rule 57Q.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) findings, stating that the reasons provided were legally sound and supported by precedent. The Tribunal referenced a previous case to support the decision. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the order allowing credit on parts and accessories of moulds and dies was rejected.