9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . JDR for the respondents. 2. After 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 Cenva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng decisions : (1) Commissioner 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, Pun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kindly be rejected. 5. After hearing both sides, I find that the appellants are covered by the provisions of Rule 2(g) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 in terms 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, Chan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the earth or are not to be treated as excisable goods but the main point is whether the inputs were used in the capital goods, which are used in the manufacture of 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. J ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
