9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 368X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby Modvat credit in respect of the capital goods was denied on the ground that the capital goods were sold to the finance company. Therefore, the appellants are not entitled to take credit in respect of the duty paid on the capital goods. 3. The contention of the appellant is that the appellant after taking the credit on the capital goods sold th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rlpool of India Ltd. v. CC, New Delhi reported in 2003 (58) RLT 241. The contention of the appellant in the above decisions of the Tribunal it was held that when the goods were not removed from the factory, the credit cannot be denied even in the case of sale of the factory. 5. The contention of the Revenue is that the appellant after taking the credit sold the capital goods, therefore, the owne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leased the goods to appellant. I find that Notification No. 27/94-C.E., dated 17-6-1994 allowed the Modvat credit in respect of the capital goods which are acquired on lease, hire-purchase or loan agreement from the finance company. It is not disputed by the Revenue that the capital goods were physically not removed from the factory. The capital goods remained in the factory and are used in the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
