9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (6) TMI 225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... former oil used in the transformer and the Commissioner (Appeals) after noting the judgment of Tribunal has allowed the appeal, against which the revenue has filed this present appeal and hence, this appeal is also taken up together along with the above two appeals of revenue for decision. The respondents have not appeared in this case, despite notice. 3. The revenue is aggrieved with the impugned Orders-in-Appeal of Commissioner (Appeals) granting Modvat credit on transformer oil in terms of the various judgments of Tribunal noted by him in his order. The Commissioner has noted that in terms of the judgment of Tribunal in the case of C.C.E. v. Nav Bharat Paper Mills as reported in 1996 (86) E.L.T. 501 the transformers have been treat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le. 5. On the other hand, the learned Consultant submits that the judgment of NGEF Ltd. is clearly not applicable on the ground that as the Tribunal dealt with coolant added thereof for which it held that it cannot be considered as a component for the purpose of transformer. He submits that it is not used as coolant in the present case or as component but to make the transformer functional. The learned Consultant also submits that in their own case vide Final Order No. 1305 & 1306/99, dated 4-6-1999, the Tribunal has already held that lubricant/grease are entitled for the benefit of Modvat credit and in terms of the judgments noted therein including Larger Bench judgment in the case of Jawahar Mills Ltd. v. C.C.E. as reported in 1999 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resent type of cases has been dismissing revenue appeals pertaining to this item including the item of lubricating oil which has been treated as capital goods in the judgments noted supra. Therefore, the issue is conclusive in nature and it is not possible to again refer the matter to the Larger Bench as three Larger Bench have considered and all dealt with the issues in one way or the other. Hence, I am of the considered opinion that the judgment of NGEF Ltd. cited supra is over-ruled by subsequent Larger Bench judgment of the Tribunal, therefore, the Tribunal's following subsequent judgment vide final order No. 1305 & 1306/99, dated 4-6-1999 is required again to be applied in batch of these cases. 8. By such application, I find ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
