TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner : Mr. Ankur Mathur for Mr. V. K. Mathur For the Respondent : Mr. Sharad Kothari and Mr. Lalit Pareek ORDER This Court admitted the appeal on 4th February, 2009 on the following substantial question of law:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in allowing the cenvat credit on items M.S. Plate, SS Plate, Beams, Hr Coils, plain Plates, Channels, Angles Joist etc, used in fabrication and erection of various sections in existing plants of the assessee by treating the same as 'capital goods' within the meaning of Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004? 2. Learned counsel for respondent/assessee submitted that issue involved in the present case has already been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vs. Hindustan Zinc Limited(supra). The judgment dated 22nd May, 2006 delivered in Union of India vs. Hindustan Zinc Limited is reproduced, as under :- The revenue through this appeal against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal requires this appeal to be admitted for deciding the following question as substantial question of law:- Whether the learned Tribunal is right in law in allowing the Modvat credit on the item MS/SS plates in the maintenance and repair work of the machinery. 2. However, it is brought to our notice that like question about the admissibility of the Modvat credit on the various items used in workshop meant for repair and maintenance the machinery, which are used for manufacture of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise Appeal No. 5/2005 we are of the opinion that for the purpose of reaching of same conclusion no substantial question of law need be raised again. Accordingly, the appeal fails and hereby dismissed . 5. The aforesaid order dated 22nd May, 2006 was passed on the basis of detailed/well considered order passed in Union of India vs. Aditya Cement (supra). 6. After considering submissions of learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that present appeal is fully covered by above referred decisions of this Court. One of the decision of this Court has already been affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court also. 7. In these circumstances, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed for the same reasons, which have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
