TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T) Shri M.K.A.K. Mohiddin, JDR, for appellant. Shri K.S. Venkatagiri, Advocate, for respondent. [Order per P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)] - The captioned appeals pertain to eligibility to MODVAT credit of duty paid on various goods claimed to be capital goods by M/s. Thirumalai Chemicals Ltd. (TCL). TCL are engaged in the manufacture of Phthalic Anhydride and Maleic Anhydride. They set up a third plant and procured capital goods during the periods 10/95 to 12/95 and 2/96 to 7/96 for the purpose. Vide order in Appeal No. 110/2000, the Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed the order of the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner denying credit of duty paid on Heat Transfer Salt (HTS), CTD bars, angles, channels, beams, joists and HR plat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 75,000/- imposed on TCL. We have heard the parties. We find that HTS is filled inside the switch condensers and distillation system which cannot function to produce without HTS. 'HTS forms an integral part of the plant for the manufacture of Phthalic Anhydride. Therefore we hold HTS as a component of the assessee's plant which falls under CSH 84.19 of the Central Excise Tariff. In terms of clause (d) of Explanation 1 to Rule 57Q (1), components of a plant falling under CSH 84.19 was eligible for capital goods credit. As regards the iron and steel goods such as angles, joists, channels, CTD bars etc., it is seen from the records that these items are parts of the plant in view of the ratio of the decision in Jawahar Mills Ltd. (supra) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal such as CCE Vs. India Cements Ltd., [2007 (208) ELT 240 (Tri.-Chen.)], CCE Vs. India Cements Ltd. [2005 (192) ELT 664 (Tri.-Chen.)] and Lloyds Metals and Engineers Ltd., Vs. Additional Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur [2003 (162) ELT 847 (Tri.-Mum.)], wherein the Tribunal had allowed capital goods credit for cement used in civil foundation for setting up machinery. The Ld. JDR argued that credit was not admissible for cement used in the construction of foundation for machinery and cited the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in UOI Vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. [2007 (218) ELT 503 (Raj.)]. We find that High Court had held in that judgment that cement used for construction of foundation for machine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
