9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 1073X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt question required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether carbon tubes and sleeves are eligible modvatable inputs in terms of the provisions of Rule 57A. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of various tungsten carbide products. The use of the inputs in question, as detailed in the memo of appeal is as under :- "(iv) The appellant states that the said input ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the metal powder at high temperature (more than 1000ºC) cracks to form soot (carbon) CH4 = C + 2H2. This carbon reacts with the metal to form Tungsten Carbide. If no carbon is mixed initially with the metal powder than this reaction can introduce about 3% of carbon in the tungsten. The requirement is 6.13%. Hence, normal practice is to add carbon black to the metal powder. If carbon tub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... If no carbon tubes are used, then the product will have less than adequate carbon. In such a case a very brittle phase called Eta-phase (CO3W3C) forms. Presence of this Eta-phase is very dangerous for the product as it breaks very easily. Hence, the product gets rejected and cannot be supplied to the market." 3. From the above the appellant contends that the carbon tubes and sleeves are es ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have also challenged the impugned order on the ground of limitation inasmuch as the Modvat credit was availed after filing a declaration and the show cause notice was issued after a gap of about two years alleging that declaration was filed with a deliberate intention to avail the Modvat credit wrongly. 4. After hearing the ld. JDR appearing for the Revenue I find that the issue is no more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... levant documents to the department along with the copies of RG-23A part-I and part-II. The declaration was duly acknowledged by the proper officer and no objection was raised in respect of the said inputs in question. As such it cannot be held that the appellant suppressed any material from the Revenue with intention to avail wrong Modvat credit. They succeed on the point of limitation also. 5.&e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
