9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ava, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Moheb Ali M., Member (T)]. This appeal is directed against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) Bhopal, who in the impugned order upheld the order of the lower authority. 2. Briefly the facts are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods and were availing Modvat facility on capital goods under Rule 57Q of Central Excis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide the case on the basis of the grounds in appeal was considered by us. Heard the ld. DR Shri K.K. Srivastava and perused the records. 4. The issue relates to interpretation of the second proviso to Rule 57S (1). The Rule reads as follows : Provided further that where the capital goods are removed after being used in or in relation to manufacture of final products from the factory for home c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contention of the noticee would have been acceptable. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) adopted this logic and confirmed the order of the lower authority. The appellant s argument is that when capital goods are removed after being used in the factory for some time then the quantum of duty of excise payable is calculated by allowing a deduction of 2.5% of credit taken for each quarter of the yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not relate to the fraction of a quarter but relates only to the year of use or a fraction thereof. We find that the interpretation given to the phrase used in the rule by the Assistant Commissioner which has been adopted by the Commissioner (Appeals) is correct. The appellant s contention that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not independently arrived at any finding but only confirmed the order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
