9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (3) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apters 72 and 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department alleged contravention of provisions of Rule 57A inasmuch as during the period 1-1-1991 (sic) to 25-3-1991 and from 26-3-1991 to 26-6-1991 in respect of Appeal E/5627/92 and likewise various periods in respective appeals, that they have taken inadmissible Modvat Credit, on account of following items :- 1. Refractory goods like ramming mass, fire bricks etc. 2. Foundry goods like isolite exolite etc. 3. Graphite fine power 4. Welding electrodes 5. Engineering goods like hot tops, minitips, B.P. sets, grinding wheels etc. 3. Accordingly, demand notices were issued to the assessees under Rule 57-1 calling upon them to explain as to why th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the Modvat Credit is available in respect of Foundary Chemicals which are used in the manufacture of sand moulds and therefore, benefit has to be granted to the assessees, following the ratio of the Larger Bench. 5. Grinding Wheels The Learned Advocate submitted that this issue is decided against the party as has been so held in the case of Jhalani Tools (I) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise as reported in 1994 (70) E.L.T. 788 and therefore, the Tribunal can decide the case against them on this input. 6. Iron Ball Rolls, Welding Set The Learned Advocate submitted that the lower authorities have not granted the benefit in respect of these items. It is his submission that these items are required for rolling the ingot into v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ger bench's judgment rendered in the case of Ram Krishna Industries (supra). Therefore, we hold that these two items are entitled for the benefit of the inputs in terms of the judgment. 8. The Learned Advocate has conceded that the benefit is not available to Refractory Bricks/Mortar in terms of the judgment rendered in the case of Collector of Central Excise, v. Raipur Steels and as held in the following judgments : 1. Mukund Iron and Steel Works Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1990 (45) E.L.T. 84] 2. Sathya Steel Strips Pvt.Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1988 (38) E.L.T. 485] 3. Escorts Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1993 (68) E.L.T. 682] 9. Following all the ratio, benefit of the Modvat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
