9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (9) TMI 212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeal is against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) by which spares for Hoist were held to be capital goods in terms of Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Commissioner had followed the judgment of the Tribunal in C.C.E., Meerut v. Nova Udyog and C.C.E. v. R.K. Marbles Others holding that Cranes and Hoists are capital goods in terms of Explanation 1(d) under Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce Application has been filed in the said case. Further, by the Circular issued by the Board on 5-7-1994, it has been clarified that credit on material handling equipment was not admissible. Hoist is a material handling equipment and credit is therefore not admissible either for Hoists or for spares of Hoists. Reliance was also placed on the Tribunal decision in C.C.E., Coimbatore v. Shanmugaraja ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to spares for the 2 Tons Hoist. 3. Ld. Counsel for the Respondents has submitted that Hoists come within the category of material handling equipment and the Tribunal has in various decisions given earlier held that material handling equipment such as EOT Cranes, Fork Lift, Conveyor Belt, etc. have been held to be capital goods for purpose of Rule 57Q. He also relies on the recent Tribunal deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... processing of final product. 4. Having regard to the view already taken by the Tribunal that material handling equipment of various kinds referred to in the case law cited by the ld. Counsel and following the ratio of Sterlite Industries India Ltd. (supra), I am of the view that admissibility for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q for 2 Tons Hoists is fully covered by the earlier decisions. The Depar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
