https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93884 The earlier capital goods credit ruling treated the manufacturing expression as not limited to ingredients directly used to produce the final product, giving rise to a question of law on whether a distribution transformer qualified as capital goods under the unamended Explanation to Rule 57Q. The reference was confined to the product actually in dispute, because the electronic control panel board was not part of the credit allowed in the impugned order. The reference application was therefore allowed with modification, and only the question relating to the distribution transformer was referred to the High Court. en-us Fri, 09 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:50:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93884 The earlier capital goods credit ruling treated the manufacturing expression as not limited to ingredients directly used to produce the final product, giving rise to a question of law on whether a distribution transformer qualified as capital goods under the unamended Explanation to Rule 57Q. The reference was confined to the product actually in dispute, because the electronic control panel board was not part of the credit allowed in the impugned order. The reference application was therefore allowed with modification, and only the question relating to the distribution transformer was referred to the High Court. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93884