Per G.R. Sharma :

The ld. Collector in the impugned order held that :

"8. On close and careful consideration of the above two provisions, I am not convinced, I can buy the view, canvassed by the party in this case. The provision under Rule 57S (2), protection under which is sought by the party ensures that the credit taken on capital goods can be utilised for payment of duty on clearances of any of the final products but the same does not mean that the credit can be taken without using the capital goods at all. Provisions under Rule 57Q which spells out the scope of the scheme refers to allowing `credit of specified duty paid on the capital goods used by the manufacturer in his factory and for utilising the credit so allowed towards payment of duty of excise leviable on the final products..... subject to the provisions of this Section.' It follows therefore, the directions contained in Rule 57Q (1) determines the utilisation of the credit as permitted under Rule 57S (2). Reading of the provision makes it clear that utilisation of the credit of duty paid is available only on `capital goods - "used" as provided under Rule 57Q (1). "Used" in the context of capital goods would mean