Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Commissioner Of Central Excise vs Avi Photochem Ltd. on 5 January, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2001(130)ELT947(TRI-MUMBAI)
ORDER Gowri Shankar, Member (T)
1. I have heard both sides. The Bench in its order had held that since the densitometer in question was an essential requirement for manufacture of finished goods in the appellants' plant, it can legitimately considered to be an input and hence Modvat credit would be available of the duty paid input.
2. It cannot be in dispute that by use of this product no change is brought about in any substance. Hence the question arises whether such products, which are not by themselves directly used to produce substances, but without which the production of goods in a factory is impossible are within the meaning of Rule 57Q. Therefore I propose to refer the question as framed whether densitometer and similar goods which by themselves do not directly produce or process any goods or bring about change in any substance but without which, the production or processing or bringing about change in the substance cannot take place is capital goods within the meaning of Rule 57Q. The registry may draw up statement or fact for reference to the High Court.