https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103973 Credit for disputed items as capital goods under Rule 57Q required a reasoned examination of the statutory definition of capital goods, including spares, components and accessories, rather than reliance only on their use in manufacture. Because the original and appellate orders did not record a clear finding on the applicability of Rules 57A and 57Q to the goods, the matter had not been properly examined. Fresh consideration was required with opportunity to the assessee and compliance with natural justice, and the impugned order was set aside with remand for de novo scrutiny of eligibility. en-us Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:06:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103973 Credit for disputed items as capital goods under Rule 57Q required a reasoned examination of the statutory definition of capital goods, including spares, components and accessories, rather than reliance only on their use in manufacture. Because the original and appellate orders did not record a clear finding on the applicability of Rules 57A and 57Q to the goods, the matter had not been properly examined. Fresh consideration was required with opportunity to the assessee and compliance with natural justice, and the impugned order was set aside with remand for de novo scrutiny of eligibility. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103973