9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Revenue has filed the present appeal. I have heard Shri K.J. Sanchis, learned JDR appearing for the Revenue. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. 2. The issue involved in the present appeal is as to whether the appellant is required to reverse the entire amount of Modvat credit availed by them in respect of capital ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g them in their factory. Thus, it cannot be held that the capital goods have been removed "as such" by the appellants as envisaged in terms of Rule 3(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The Board in its Circular F. No. 643/34/2002-CX, dt. 1-7-02 also has clarified at Point No. 14 that with reference to Capital Goods the duty is to be paid will be determined after allowing depreciation in terms of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Profiles India P. Ltd. v. CCE, Ghaziabad - 2004 (167) E.L.T. 208 (Tri.-Delhi), M/s. Jamna Auto Industries Ltd. v. CCE - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 181 (Tri.) and M/s. Whirlpool of India Ltd. v. CCE - 2003 (53) RLT 241 (CESTAT) cited by the Appellants. Therefore, no duty is payable in respect of the said capital goods, which were not physically removed from the factory. 9. Regarding removal of inputs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
