SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

S.KALYANAM, V.P.GULATI
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Balasubramanian,P. Sundararaju

ORDER

V.P. Gulati, Member

1. This appeal is against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras. The learned Collector (Appeals) denied the benefit of MODVAT credit in respect of oxygen and acetylene gas used by the appellants in the manufacture of the specified finished product under Rule 57A. The learned Collector (Appeals) has held as under in this regard:

As regards the gases, I am unable to agree with the appellants view that oxygen and acetylene should also merit Modvat credit. Cutting torch is basically an appliance used for cutting and welding. The gases are primarily used in the cutting torch, which falls in the excluded category of inputs under Rule 57-A as the gases used along with the cutting torch have also disqualify for the credit.

2. The learned Counsel for the appellants pleaded that this Bench of the Tribunal as also the East Regional Bench, Calcutta have allowed the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of Oxygen and Acetylene gas used in the manufacture of specified finished product under similar circumstances.

3. The learned SDR concedes that the matter is covered against the Revenue. He has no specific plea to make in this regard.

4. We observe that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top