https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89814 Repeated use of goods in manufacture does not by itself establish that they are admissible inputs under Rule 57A, because such use may also indicate that they fall within the exclusion for tools, appliances or equipment. Where the composition and function of the goods are not clearly established, the authority must give a reasoned speaking finding on why the exclusion does or does not apply. The appellate order was therefore treated as inadequate, set aside, and the matter remanded for fresh consideration on whether Saggars were excluded articles or eligible inputs. en-us Fri, 31 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Sep 2011 18:09:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89814 Repeated use of goods in manufacture does not by itself establish that they are admissible inputs under Rule 57A, because such use may also indicate that they fall within the exclusion for tools, appliances or equipment. Where the composition and function of the goods are not clearly established, the authority must give a reasoned speaking finding on why the exclusion does or does not apply. The appellate order was therefore treated as inadequate, set aside, and the matter remanded for fresh consideration on whether Saggars were excluded articles or eligible inputs. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 31 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89814