9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the principles laid down in the decision reported in [2010 (7) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur V. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.) and held in favour of the assessee. - Following the principles laid down in the decision (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur V. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.) and the earlier decision of this Court in [2013 (1) TMI 5 - Madras High Court] , we are inclined to allow the appeal, thereby set aside theorder of the Tribunal - Decided in favour of assessee. - Civil Misc Appeal Nos. 3270 to 3272 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 3-7-2015 - R. Sudhakar And K. B. K. Vasuki, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Muthuvenkataraman M/s Mohammed Shaffiq For the Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (227) ELT 107]. As against the same, the Department pursued the matter before the Appellate Tribunal. 5. The Tribunal following the decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. Others reported in 2010 (253) ELT 440 allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the assessee has preferred the present appeals. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee submits that the issue involved in these appeals is covered by a decision of this Court dated 10.7.2014 in C.M.A.No.1265 of 2014, wherein, this Court following the ratio laid down in the decision reported in 2010 (255) E.L.T.481 (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur V. Rajasthan Spinning Weaving Mills Ltd.) and the earlier decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Mills Ltd.) and in particular Paragraph Nos.12 and 13, wherein the Apex Court had applied the user test by following the Jawahar Mills's case, this Court held that steel plates and M.S.Channels used in the fabrication of chimney would fall within the ambit of capital goods . In the face of this decision in the assessee's own case there being no new circumstance or decision in favour of the Revenue, we do not find any good ground to take a different view herein too. 10. As far as the reliance placed by the Revenue on the decision reported in 2011 (270) E.L.T.465 (SC) (Saraswati Sugar Mills V. Commissioner of C.Ex., Delhi-III) is concerned, we do not think that the said decision would be of any assistance to the Revenue, consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o dismissed. 9. From a perusal of the above said judgment, it is seen that there is no change in the circumstance and this Court had already considered the issue and held that the decision reported in (Saraswati Sugar Mills V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - III) in Civil Appeal No.5295 of 2003 dated 02.08.2011 is distinguishable on facts. This Court applied the principles laid down in the decision reported in 2010 (255) E.L.T.481 (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur V. Rajasthan Spinning Weaving Mills Ltd.) and held in favour of the assessee. 10. Hence, following the principles laid down in the decision reported in 2010 (255) E.L.T.481 (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur V. Rajasthan Spinning Weaving Mills Ltd.) and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
