TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts. When the above said conclusion was inevitable, as held by the Tribunal, the respondent was entitled to avail Modvat credit duty paid on the capital goods concerned. Consequently, the order of the Tribunal cannot be faulted. The question of law is therefore, answered in the negative and the appeal stands dismissed - C.M.A. No. 1961 of 2005 and C.M.P. No. 10540 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 4-2-2011 - F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla and N. Kirubakaran, JJ. Shri T.R. Senthilkumar, SCGSC, for the Appellant. Shri K.S. Venkatagiri for Lakshmikumaran, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT The Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore is the appellant. 2. The substantial question of law raised in this appeal reads as under. Whether the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... edit of duty inasmuch as the said plant process the goods of the registered factory. The original authority rejected the claim by holding that 57Q(1) stipulates that the capital goods should be installed in the place of manufacture of final products and not in the place outside the place of manufacture of final products. The Commissioner affirmed the order of the original authority. The respondent approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 15-10-2004 allowed the appeal and directed for refund to be sanctioned. Before passing the impugned order, the Tribunal called for the report of the Commissionerate. The Tribunal, after noting the findings contained in the report of the Commissioner held that the Mother Roll Plan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Act nor under the Factories Act. It has been exempted from licence control under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 5. Going by the above report of the Department, I have to hold that the Mother Roll Plant is, for all practical purposes, a part of the appellants main factory. Whether it is included in the main factory plan is a concern of the department and this aspect can be separately taken care of by them. For the present, I can reasonably state (sic) that the subject capital goods were used by the appellants in the factory of production of final products and, accordingly, the appellants were entitled to avail Modvat credit of the duty paid thereon, under Rule 57Q. The decision in Thermax Ltd. (supra) is in firm support o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t s own premises situated just 500 mts away from the place of manufacture and that after carrying out necessary connected processes in that premises which is called as Mother Roll Plant, the same is brought to the place of manufacture where the final products is rolled out. Therefore, the activity of the respondent in the usage of the capital goods can be said to be part of its manufacturing activities of final product in its registered factory. It is also not the case of the appellant that by usage of the capital goods in the Mother Roll Plant, the same was in any way alienated to any one, other than the respondent factory. 8. The salient points noted in the report of the Commissioner established beyond doubt that the capital goods were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
