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

G.R.SHARMA, S.S.KANG
Malvika Steel Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mchander Sakheran, Krishan Kumar, Menon, Lalita Pillai, Manish Pushkarna,Y.R. Kilania

ORDER

Per S. S. Kang :

The appellants filed this appeal against the order-in-Appeal dated 30.11.95 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Allahabad. In this case, the Modvat Credit on capital goods, that is on cement and steel structure was denied on the ground that it does not come under the definition of capital goods under Rule 57Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944.

2. The appellants are setting up a Blast furnace in its integrated steel plant for production of pig iron. The appellants took the benefit of Modvat Credit on capital goods, in respect of cement and steel structure used in erection and fabrication of blast furnace under Rule 57Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. Show cause notice was issued on the ground that cement and steel structure are not directly related in manufacture of final product and also are not included as capital goods as defined under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. After adjudication the adjudicating authority held that cement and steel structure are not plant, machinery or equipment as per definition under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Appellants filed appeal and the same was dismissed.

3. Learned Counsel appearing on

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