2004 (3) TMI 681

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. [Order]. - Appellants filed these appeals against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby credit of Rs. 3,24,401/- and of Rs. 8,428/- was denied. 2. The appellant is not pressing the appeal in respect of the disallowance of Modvat credit of Rs. 8,428/-. 3. The contention of the appellants is that they availed credit in respect of the capital goo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... k procedure. The appellants had sent the capital goods for repairs, therefore, they are not covered under the provisions of Rule 57S of the Central Excise Rules. 6. I find that the appellants initially availed credit on the capital goods at the time of removal of goods for repair. The appellants reversed the credit under the provisions of Rule 57S(7) of the Central Excise Rules. When the cap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X