Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Commissioner Of Customs And Central ... vs Pololefins Industries Limited, Thane on 7 June, 2001
ORDER Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the respondent was entitled to take modvat credit of the duty paid on plastic materials used by it to make bags which it used to pack polytethlene and ethylene vinyl acetate manufactured by it. In the order impugned in this appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), relying upon various decision including that of Madras High Court in Ponds (India) Limited Vs. CCE 1993 (63) ELT 3 and of the Tribunal in Ashwin Vanaspati Industries Vs. CCE 1994 (70) ELT 754 has held that the exclusion contained in clause (b) of the Explanation to Rule 57A would to apply to this material used to make the packing material.
2. The appeal challenges this conclusion on the ground that the plastic bags were themselves identifiable products and therefore cold not be considered to be intermediate product. The departmental representative reiterates this contention.
3. This contention is entirely unsustainable. The ratio The judgement of the Madras High Court and the decisions of the Tribunal that the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon has been communicated as instructions by the Ministry of Finance in its circular dated 30.6.1997 reproduced in 1997 (21) RLT N20. This circular makes it clear that the packing material would include not only ready to use packing material but raw material used to make such packing materials.
4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.