9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing both sides, I find that prima facie, the case is in favour of the appellants. Therefore, I waive the condition of predeposit and hear the appeal with the consent of both the sides. 3. Shri Chattopadhyay submits that the ld. Commissioner failed to appreciate that in the present case, the appellants are covered by the provisions of Rule 2(g) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 in terms of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore v. Jawahar Mills Ltd. - 2001 (132) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.); (2) Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd. v. CCE, Nagpur - 2004 (64) RLT 732 (CESTAT-Mum.); (3) Indian Seamless Steels Alloys Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune - 1999 (113) E.L.T. 222 (Tribunal); (4) CCE, Jaipur v. J.K. Cement Works and vice versa - 2000 (125) E.L.T. 480 (T) = 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Explanation (2) of the said Rules. The inputs include goods used in the manufacture of capital goods, which are further used in the factory of the manufacturer. In the present case, the inputs in the form of MS Steel, Angles, Channels, Bars, Joist, HR Plates etc. for the purposes of manufacture of the capital goods in their factory. The capital goods manufactured in the factory were kiln, m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... final products. In the present case, the capital goods were used as inputs for manufacture of final product. The same view was taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in the cases of Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore v. Jawahar Mills Ltd. reported in 2001 (132) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), CCE, Jaipur v. J.K. Cement Works and vice-versa reported in 2000 (36) RLT 451 (CEGAT) and Lloyds Steel In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
