Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Calcutta
Boc India Limited vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 11 September, 2001
JUDGMENT
Archana Wadhwa The issue involved in the present appeal relates to the admissibility of the MODVAT Credit in respect of the Compressor purchased by the appellants from M/s. Kirloskar and declared as capital goods under their declaration dated 14.12.1995. The authorities below have held that the said Compressor is not a capital good in terms of Explanation 1(d)(iv) under Rule 57Q. As such, by holding that the Compressor in question is used for refrigerating purposes, they have denied the MODVAT Credit.
2. The contention of the appellants is that such Compressor is used for chilling the water, which in turn is used for spraying on dissolved acetylene cylinders. As such, they are covered by the main definition clause of Capital Goods. For this proposition, they have relied upon a number of decisions of Tribunals.
3. I find that the said decisions referred to by the learned Advocate were not placed before the authorities below. It is also not clear as to whether the said decisions belonged to the period after the amendment of Rule 57Q with effect from 16.3.95. The appellants have not disputed that use of the Compressor for chilling the water, which as rightly held by the authorities, amounts to refrigeration activities. However, inasmuch as the various decisions were not placed before the Assistant Commissioner, I set aside the impugned Order and remand the matter to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh decision.
(Pronounced)