1995 (11) TMI 213 - AT - Central Excise

Issues Involved:
1. Admissibility of MODVAT Credit for steel balls used in manufacturing.
2. Classification of steel balls as inputs, tools, or equipment under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Admissibility of MODVAT Credit for Steel Balls Used in Manufacturing

Summary of Appeals:
- Appeal No. E-38/94: The appellant company, M/s. Magnetix (I) Ltd., contested the order by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Calcutta, which denied MODVAT Credit for steel balls, stating they are neither raw materials nor inputs as per Rule 57A.
- Appeal No. E-105/94: The appellant Collector challenged the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) decision, which allowed MODVAT Credit for steel balls, treating them as inputs integral to the finished product.
- Appeal No. E-89/95: The appellant Collector contested a similar decision by the Collector (Appeals), which followed the reasoning in Appeal No. E-105/94, allowing MODVAT Credit for steel balls.

Tribunal's Findings:
- The Tribunal noted that steel balls are used as grinding media in the manufacturing process of "Hard Ferrites" and get corroded and absorbed into the final product.
- The Department argued that steel balls are appliances and not inputs under Rule 57A, as they do not remain identifiable in the final product.
- The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's decision in *Collector of Central Excise v. Rajasthan State Chemical Works*, which stated that any process integrally connected with the ultimate production is considered "in relation to the manufacture."

Conclusion:
- The Tribunal concluded that since steel balls are consumed and become part of the final product during the manufacturing process, they are to be treated as inputs.
- Therefore, the steel balls qualify for MODVAT Credit under Rule 57A.

Issue 2: Classification of Steel Balls as Inputs, Tools, or Equipment

Arguments by the Department:
- The Department contended that steel balls are appliances or tools used for grinding and do not qualify as inputs under Rule 57A.
- They cited previous Tribunal decisions, including *Electrosteel Castings Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise* and *Collector of Central Excise v. Indian Plywood Mfg. Co. Ltd.*, to support their stance.

Arguments by the Assessee:
- The assessee argued that steel balls are not attached to any machine or tool and are integral to the production process, thus qualifying as inputs.
- They referenced the Calcutta High Court's decision in *Singh Alloys Ltd. v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise*, which emphasized that items integral to the production process should be considered as inputs.

Tribunal's Analysis:
- The Tribunal distinguished the current case from *Electrosteel Castings Ltd.*, noting that steel balls in this case are not machine parts but are consumed in the manufacturing process.
- The Tribunal also referenced the Calcutta High Court's interpretation that chemicals and other items integral to production should not be classified as machinery or tools.

Conclusion:
- The Tribunal concluded that steel balls do not fit the definitions of machinery, tools, or appliances as per the technical and judicial interpretations.
- The steel balls are integral to the manufacturing process and thus qualify as inputs eligible for MODVAT Credit.

Final Judgment:
- Appeal Nos. E-105/94 and E-89/95 filed by the Revenue were dismissed.
- Appeal No. E-38/94 filed by M/s. Magnetix (India) Ltd. was allowed with consequential reliefs.

The Tribunal ruled that steel balls used in the manufacturing process qualify as inputs under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and are entitled to MODVAT Credit.

← Previous Next →