2000 (12) TMI 197

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ition of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amount, we take up the appeal itself for disposal. 2. Demand of duty of Rs. 1,45,45,403.81 has been confirmed against the appellants by denying them the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of the various capital goods received by them during the period from March, 1994 to September, 1994, on the ground that the same has been availed and utilised by them be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... submits that the above factual position has been accepted by the Commissioner, but going by the definition of capital goods, Commissioner concludes that the said definition is suggestive of the fact that the capital goods are required to be installed before the credit is taken of the same. He places strong reliance on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Pudumji Pulp Paper Mills v. Commissioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... not be blamed for taking credit and utilising the same before the actual installation of the capital goods. 6. The reliance by the adjudicating authority upon the definition of capital goods, is not appropriate inasmuch as the same cannot be read as a pre-condition of taking of credit. Accordingly, following the ratio of the earlier decision of the Tribunal referred supra, we set aside the impugn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X