2000 (5) TMI 515 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of Notification No. 123/81-C.E. dated 2-6-1981 for 100% E.O.U. regarding entitlement to exemption for "Transformer Oil Purification Plant."

Detailed Analysis:

The dispute in the present appeal revolves around whether the respondents, operating as 100% E.O.U., are eligible for the benefits under Notification No. 123/81-C.E., dated 2-6-1981, specifically concerning a "Transformer Oil Purification Plant" utilized in their operations. The Commissioner (Appeals) had granted the respondents the benefit of the said Notification, emphasizing the broad scope of the expression "brought in connection with the manufacture of articles." The Commissioner noted that the purification plant was crucial for maintaining oil quality, necessary to prevent damage to the transformer and ensure uninterrupted production. Relying on a previous Tribunal judgment in a similar case, the Commissioner extended the Notification's benefits to the purification plant, a decision now challenged before the Tribunal.

During the hearing, arguments were presented by both parties, with the Revenue contending that the purification plant, used for oil purification, should not be considered a capital good directly linked to the manufacture of charge chrome. Conversely, the respondents asserted that the plant was essential for charge chrome production. The Tribunal examined the Notification, which exempts excisable capital goods when brought in connection with manufacturing activities in an approved 100% E.O.U. facility. The Tribunal clarified that the phrase "when brought in connection with the manufacture of articles" should not be narrowly construed to include only equipment directly involved in final product manufacturing. It was acknowledged that the purification plant played a vital role in maintaining the transformer and ensuring operational efficiency by purifying oil for recycling. Referring to a prior Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal emphasized that consumables like the oil used for electricity generation, indirectly linked to manufacturing, could qualify for exemption under such Notifications.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found no fault in the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision to extend the Notification benefits to the Transformer Oil Purification Plant acquired by the respondents. The Tribunal emphasized that the Notification's scope encompassed capital goods essential for the manufacturing process, even if not directly involved in final product creation. As a result, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals)' ruling and affirming the respondents' entitlement to the Notification's benefits for the purification plant used in their manufacturing operations.