https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87179 Steel shots used in shot blasting were treated as parts or accessories of the shot blasting machine, not as independent tools, because they perform cleaning only when projected at high velocity by the machine. On that reasoning, the exclusion clause in Rule 57A was not attracted on the premise that the inputs were tools, and the suggested reference question based on that assumption did not arise from the Bench's order. The application for reference was therefore dismissed, as there was no adjudication sustaining denial of Modvat credit on the footing that steel shots were tools. en-us Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:40:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87179 Steel shots used in shot blasting were treated as parts or accessories of the shot blasting machine, not as independent tools, because they perform cleaning only when projected at high velocity by the machine. On that reasoning, the exclusion clause in Rule 57A was not attracted on the premise that the inputs were tools, and the suggested reference question based on that assumption did not arise from the Bench's order. The application for reference was therefore dismissed, as there was no adjudication sustaining denial of Modvat credit on the footing that steel shots were tools. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 11 Jun 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87179