2005 (9) TMI 494

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... S. Raghu, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. Both the Revenue and the assessee are aggrieved with the O.I.A. No. 23/2002-C.E., dated 31-1-2002. By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has noted that the Capital Goods had not been utilized for manufacture of final products and hence, they were not entitled to avail the Modvat credit. He has also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dered in the case of BHEL v. CCE, Bangalore - 2002 (50) RLT 208 (CEGAT-Bang.) wherein it has been held that Modvat credit cannot be denied in respect of inputs still lying in the factory, though they have been written off in the books of account. He points out that this citation refers to earlier ruling of the Tribunal rendered in the case of Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. - 1992 (60) E.L.T. 479 (T). He su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... had been installed in the factory. Due to certain reasons, the Capital Goods could not be made functional as orders from Puegot Car Company were cancelled. The Capital Goods have already been installed and can be used at any time. Therefore, in terms of the Tribunal ruling cited by the Counsel, the denial of Modvat credit on Capital Goods is not proper. The said order is set aside by allowing the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X