https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104728 Modvat credit was not barred merely because spares of a cooling tower were used with a vapour absorption heat pump, since the relevant inquiry was whether the spares themselves were classifiable under Heading 84.19 and that heading was not excluded under Rule 57Q. The declaration and invoices were material to determine the correct classification, and the use of the cooling tower in connection with an excluded machine did not by itself defeat eligibility. Earlier authorities relied on by the lower forum were inapplicable because they arose under the pre-amendment version of Rule 57Q. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh examination of the classification evidence. en-us Mon, 04 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Mar 2012 11:15:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104728 Modvat credit was not barred merely because spares of a cooling tower were used with a vapour absorption heat pump, since the relevant inquiry was whether the spares themselves were classifiable under Heading 84.19 and that heading was not excluded under Rule 57Q. The declaration and invoices were material to determine the correct classification, and the use of the cooling tower in connection with an excluded machine did not by itself defeat eligibility. Earlier authorities relied on by the lower forum were inapplicable because they arose under the pre-amendment version of Rule 57Q. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh examination of the classification evidence. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 04 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104728