2006 (11) TMI 522

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er per : S.S. Kang, Vice President]. -  Heard both sides. The issue involved in this appeal is whether the Evaporation Boat which is used with the Evaporation machine is entitled for the credit as capital goods. The credit was denied on the ground that Evaporation Boats are not refractory material. 2. The contention of the appellant is that they are engaged in the manufacture of metall .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... machine and without this machine, the metallising film is not possible. Therefore, being component part of that machine, the vacuum boats are entitled as capital goods. 4. The contention of the revenue is that the Tribunal in the following decisions 1.      Melton India Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut 2000 (121) E.L.T. 701 2.   Madhya Pradesh Polypropylene Ltd. v. CC .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lising machine and without these evaporation boats, the metallising of film is not possible. The decision relied upon by revenue in respect of credit as inputs. The Tribunal in the decisions relied upon by revenue alter taking into consideration the scope of definition of inputs held that the evaporation boats cannot be held to be input. In the case of Madhya Pradesh Polypropylene Ltd (supra), the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X