2004 (4) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an appeal filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 43/99(H-I)(D)-C.E., dated 18-10-99 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad. 2. Shri M.K. Madhyastha, learned JDR appearing for the Revenue pleaded that the respondents had availed credit of duty on rough shaped ferrous or other alloy steel forgings falling under sub-heading Nos. 7207.90, 7227.00 and 84.55.00 of Central Exc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es, the respondents are eligible for credit on goods received which are machines or machinery parts and not semi-finished goods which require further processing. 3. Shri L.N. Goyal, learned Consultant appearing for the respondents pleaded that period involved in this case is from January, 95 to April, 95. He stated that castings which were received by them were trimmed and further worked to make .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ding of the Central Excise Tariff Act. These have been classified under Chapters 72 and 84. These have been used as components of the machine by doing trimming or grooving which operations do not amount to manufacture. There is no prohibition that respondents cannot do any operation on the components or spares or accessories received by them in their factory before using the same in the machine. W .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X