TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 422X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oom would have to be treated as items of capital goods - The revenue appeal is dismissed - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/73/2005 - 132/2011-EX(PB) - Dated:- 24-1-2011 - Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, Shri Rakesh Kumar, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri V. Choudhary, DR, for the Appellant. S/Shri Jatin and K.K. Anand, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order per : Rakesh Kumar, Member (T)]. The respondent are a 100% EOU engaged in Apiculture that is production of honey for export. As per Annexure I to Notification No. 22/03-C.E., dated 31-3-03, they are eligible to acquire free of central excise duty, the capital goods and their spares and accessories and other items as listed in the Annexure I to the Notification. The responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i.e. pre-fabricated structures, PUFF Panels and RPF panels are not capital goods and hence the same are not covered by Sl. No. 1 of Annexure I to the exemption notification, that since notification does not disclose any definition of the terms capital goods , the definition of this term as given in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 has to be adopted, that the items, in question, are not covered by the definition of capital goods, as given in Rule 2 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and that the Tribunal s judgment in the case of CCE, Pune-I v. Weikfield Agro Products reported in 2002 (143) E.L.T. 596 (Tri. - Mumbai) relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not relevant, as pre-fabricated structures/PUFF Panels etc. were not the items sought to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the term inputs and capital goods as given in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 or Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 is relevant only for the purpose of Cenvat credit and there is no justification to apply the same to an exemption notification meant for 100% EOUs. Since there is no definition of term capital goods in the exemption Notification No. 22/03-C.E., the term has to be interpreted in the sense in which it is understood in common parlance and on this basis, the pre-fabricated structures, PUFF panels and RPF panels required by the respondent for cold room would have to be treated as items of capital goods. We find that same view has been taken by the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Pune-I v. Weikfield Agro Products (supra), wherein Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
