https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104439 The proposed Revenue questions were found not to raise a referable question of law because they were either outside the controversy actually decided or depended on factual application of settled Modvat rules. The dispute concerned whether a DG set qualified as capital goods and whether the Modvat declaration had to be filed before the controversy was resolved; the record showed the declaration was filed after settlement of the dispute but within the period permitted by the rules. As no misinterpretation of the rules was shown, the reference application was rejected. en-us Tue, 26 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:20:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104439 The proposed Revenue questions were found not to raise a referable question of law because they were either outside the controversy actually decided or depended on factual application of settled Modvat rules. The dispute concerned whether a DG set qualified as capital goods and whether the Modvat declaration had to be filed before the controversy was resolved; the record showed the declaration was filed after settlement of the dispute but within the period permitted by the rules. As no misinterpretation of the rules was shown, the reference application was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 26 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104439