TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 414X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - The respondents in this appeal of the department are engaged in the manufacture of cotton yarn. They had obtained Central Excise registration under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 on 17-6-1997 and had started their manufacturing activity subsequently. The capital goods required for the purpose had been procured prior t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the appellant and the learned consultant for the respondents, we note that the short question arising for consideration in this case is whether the total period of 3 months allowed under Rule 57T(1) for the filing of declaration in respect of capital goods should be reckoned with reference to the date of registration of the factory or the date of receipt of the capital goods by the party. The ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... factory was a place or premises in which excisable goods were manufactured, including precincts thereof. No place could be called factory , without manufacturing activity. In this view of the matter, the capital goods can be held to have been received in the respondent s factory on only 17-6-1997. With reference to this date, admittedly, the MODVAT declaration was filed within the condonable per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
