Per V.K. Agrawal :

The issue involved in this appeal, filed by the Revenue, is whether Modvat Credit of the duty paid on Rough Rolls is admissible to M/s. Jindal Rolling Mills.

2. When the matter was called no one was present on behalf of the Respondent inspite of notice nor there was any request for adjournment of the hearing. We observe that in the past also when the matter was posted on 22.6.2001 and 19.9.2001 no one was present on behalf of the Respondents. We have, therefore, taken up the appeal for hearing after hearing Shri Ashok Kumar, learned D.R., and perusing the records.

3. The learned D.R. submitted that the Modvat Credit was not available on rough rolls; that the finished rolls are not inputs of finished goods but are parts of the machinery and hence, are capital goods; that the benefit of Notification No. 281/86 dated 24.4.86 and 217/86 dated 2.4.86 is not admissible; that the benefit of Notification No. 67/95 dated 16.3.95 is also not available.

4. We have considered the submissions of the learned D.R. and perused the records. We observe from the impugned Order that the Commissioner (Appeals) had extended the benefit of Notification No. 281/86 following the ratio of the decision in the case of Modela Steels Alloys Ltd. Vs. CCE, 1999 (32) RLT 247. The Commissioner (Appeals) also held that parts of machine which are covered by description of inputs as contained in Column 2 of the table annexed to Notification No. 217/86 are eligible for the benefit of exemption under the said notification. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also extended the benefit of Notification No. 67/95 w.e.f. 16.3.95. The Revenue contended that the finished rolls are not inputs as these are parts of machinery but has not advanced any other reason for denying the benefit of notification. It has been held by the Larger Bench in the case of Union Carbide India Ltd. Vs. CCE, Calcutta-1, 1996 (86) ELT 613 that the exclusion clause only confine to complete machine or units and did not cover parts thereof. Following the ratio of this decision the benefit of Notification No. 217/86 is available to the Respondents and w.e.f. 16.3.95 the benefit of Notification No. 67/95 will be available to the Respondents. Accordingly the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.