9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (7) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd fittings of iron and steel was denied by the original adjudicating authority for the period of 23-7-1996 to 31-8-1996 on the ground that these items were specifically covered by the definition under Rule 57Q(1) only from 1-9-1996. Shri Bagaria has submitted that the department has not taken objection to availing of Modvat credit on the said items for the period prior and after to the period involved in the present appeal. These tubes, pipes and fittings are used by the respondents to connect various machines and equipments for the continuous maintenance of flow of liquid and chemical reactions desired at various places are completed. Shri Bagaria drew our attention to the following cases vide which Modvat credit has been allowed in respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lassification under Heading No. 68.50 the respondents claimed the classification under Heading 84.17. The said dispute is reported to be pending before the Commissioner (Appeals) of Customs. The respondents contention is that classification, whether under Chapter 68 or Chapter 84 has got nothing to do with the admissibility of the Modvat credit on the said goods which were components/spare accessories, machines, machinery and plant etc. and were covered by the definition of capital goods under Rule 57Q. The respondents also relied upon Board s Circular No. 276/110/96-TRU, dated 2-12-1996 vide which it was clarified that parts components and accessories need not be covered under Chapters 82, 84, 85/90 for admissibility of Modvat credit and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocess of manufacture. We find the respondents contention is correct and allow the Modvat credit on the said goods. 9. Modvat credit in respect of terminal stamp falling under sub-heading 8504.00 was disallowed by the Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the said goods do not seem to be covered by sub-heading 8504.00. The respondents have produced the purchase documents showing classification and payment of duty on the said item under Heading 8504.00. The ld. Advocate for the respondents pleaded that the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over their factory does not have any authority to re-do the classification done by the Central Excise authorities having jurisdiction over the manufacturers factory. Even in the memo of app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
