Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2002 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2002 (6) TMI 127 - AT - Central Excise
Issues: Eligibility of goods as capital goods for MODVAT Credit under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
Analysis: 1. Issue of Disallowed Capital Goods Credit: The appeals revolve around the question of whether certain goods, including S.S. Plates, Plain Plates, Hot rolled and Annealed S.S. Sheets, and Iron and Steel items, are eligible for MODVAT Credit under Rule 57Q. The Appellant argued that these items were used for repairing machinery in their factory, making them components eligible for credit. Citing relevant case law, the Appellant contended that if goods made from these items are capital goods, then the items themselves qualify as components for credit. The Appellant relied on decisions such as D.S.M. Sugar Mills v. CCE, Meerut and Rosa Sugar Works v. CCE, Kanpur to support their claim. 2. Revenue's Position and Counter-Argument: The Revenue, represented by the Departmental Representative, maintained that the goods in question were not covered under Rule 57Q for capital goods credit. Specifically, in one appeal, the Revenue highlighted the use of hot rolled and annealed S.S. sheets for fabricating a reactor tank, arguing that these sheets did not fall under the specified capital goods categories. The Revenue emphasized the classification of the reactor tank under Heading No. 75.09 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, which was not included in the relevant table under Rule 57Q. 3. Judgment and Decision: After considering both sides' arguments, the Tribunal held that MODVAT Credit under Rule 57Q was available to the Appellants for the items used in repairing machinery for manufacturing final products. Following the precedent set by the cited cases, the Tribunal allowed the credit for most items. However, the Tribunal ruled that the MODVAT Credit for hot rolled and annealed SS sheets used in fabricating the reactor tank was not available, as the reactor tank did not qualify as a specified capital good under Rule 57Q. As a result, the Tribunal upheld the disallowance of credit for these specific sheets. All appeals were disposed of accordingly.
|