Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether credit on the disputed items, namely an electrical hoist, static convertor, air circuit breaker and fuse switch unit, was admissible as capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules.
Analysis: The electrical hoist was treated as material handling equipment and as an essential automatic part of the production process, bringing the paper to the cutting point without manual labour. The remaining items were found to be electrical equipment used for conversion, protection, switching, control and distribution of electricity in the paper machine. The definition of capital goods under the explanation to Rule 57Q was applied, and the reasoning in the cited Tribunal decisions supported inclusion of these items within that definition.
Conclusion: The credit was admissible on all the disputed items and the challenge by Revenue failed.