Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1997 (8) TMI 218

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mselves, and which has been disallowed and confirmed for recovery under Rule 57U of Central Excise Rules, 1944, read with Section 11A of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. He has held that the remaining portion of demand is dropped being not sustainable. A penalty of Rs. 35,000/- has been confirmed. 2. The case rests on three issues, one pertaining to non-production of duplicate copy of invoice involving credit of Rs. 839/-. 3. On this point the Learned Chartered Accountant submits that they had produced a carbon copy of the invoice along with original. It is his contention that only the words marked to the transporter had not been stamped on the invoice i.e. duplicate for transporter had not been marked. This is only a technical vio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... led a declaration on 21-4-1994 in which they had declared that they would be taking Modvat credit in respect of `textile machinery and parts . The items being a spare of textile machinery, it was entitled for the benefit of Modvat credit. He points out that the Learned Commissioner has recorded that they did not produce the challan which is not correct. They had produced the invoices and challans, which have not been examined. He submits that he will be in a position to satisfy on this point also. 7. I have heard the Learned DR. 8. On a careful consideration, and on perusal of these invoices, I notice that the description of the goods `Doffer Wire , has been written in hand and so also the vehicle number and serial number. Merely becaus .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd gives the result on the basis of which it is determined as to whether the goods are manufactured as per the requirement or not. He submits that without this computer, the final product cannot be manufactured as per the requirement. Therefore, he contends that this `personal computer is required to be considered as a capital goods to be used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product. 10. As regards the `Vaccum Cleaner , he submits that it is installed on the machine itself which works along with the machine and it cannot be separated. He submits that it is not a Humidification plant, which is installed separately and only the Tribunal had denied the benefit in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Shanmugaraja Spin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... asives Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise as reported in 1997 (91) E.L.T. 700. He submits that as regards the transformers are concerned, the benefit cannot be denied, as the matter has been settled. 13. The Learned DR submits that the judgment of the Tribunal as regards the Transformers are against the provision of Rule 57Q(2), as there cannot be estoppel against law; the matter is required to be referred to be Larger Bench as far as transformers are concerned. The Learned DR submits that the transformers have been installed before 16-3-1995 and the amendment to the Rule 57Q incorporating transformers are eligible capital goods was made by Notification No. 11/95-C.E., dated 16-3-1995. 14. Countering the argument, the Learned Chartered .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Learned DR, as I find that the Tribunal has clarified all the points raised by him in the case of Valley Abrasives Ltd. At this stage, the Learned DR forcibly argued that in the case of Shanmugaraja Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal has observed that there has to be a nexus between the goods and the plant and in case of transformers, it does not have direct nexus and participation in the manufacturing process. I am not in a position to appreciate his argument, as I notice that this point has been dealt with in all the judgments referred to and there is no ground made out for reference to Larger Bench. Therefore, I hold that the appellants are entitled to benefit of Modvat credit in respect of transformer. 16. As regards the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates