2000 (10) TMI 393

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... states that for taking credit, manufacturer shall file a declaration which was a mandatory condition. Respondents appeared to have filed consolidated declaration on 27-11-1995 in which it was alleged that they had failed to include the impugned goods specifically but had given a general description which was not sufficient as held in the case of Indian v. Hume Pipe Co. Ltd. - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 885 (Tribunal). Further, Revenue contends in this appeal that allowing Modvat credit on air compressor, cables, electric switch boards and circuit breakers prior to the amendment of Rule 57Q w.e.f. 16-3-1995 was not permissible since air compressor and its parts were specified as capital goods only w.e.f. 16-3-1995 and prior to that date they were not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted in 1998 (108) E.L.T. 47 is in their favour and they are eligible for credit on these items relying upon the abovesaid decision. 5. We have considered the submissions and find that the Jawahar Mills decision of the Larger Bench - 1999 (108) E.L.T. 47 has considered cables, electric switch boards, air circuit breakers, air compressors etc., to be capital goods. We do not find any infringement on the part of Commissioner (Appeals) coming to a decision that subject goods serve an important usage in connecting electricity to the machines to the transformer yard as a whole and each and every machine from the designated panels and switch boards are accessories of such capital goods and electricity can pass on only when switch were used a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... inery parts which were covered under the said sub-heading. Since appellant is a manufacturer of cotton yarn and would be familiar with the subject goods to be only as parts of his machine and would be dealing with them as such and has from the inspection declaration is found to be declaring them as parts of said machine, which the Commissioner (Appeals) has also found in his order to be parts and accessories of the capital goods of the respondents manufacturer in this case. Therefore, we do not find any case or cause to deny the benefit of Modvat credit on capital goods in the facts of this case. 7. In view of our findings, we reject the Revenue's appeals and confirm the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Ordered accordingly.
Ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X