1994 (6) TMI 108

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., for the Respondent. [Order]. - This appeal has been filed by M/s. Hilton Rubbers Ltd. against the order of the Addl. Collector. The Addl. Collector in his order had held : "I have examined the case records carefully and on examination, I found that Polyster Film used as a separator is not an input for the purpose of Rule 57A which defines `inputs' as inputs which are manufactured and us....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n rem." 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that M/s. Hilton Rubbers Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of Conveyor and Transmission Belts. They filed a declaration for availing modvat credit on Polyster film as input for the manufacture of Conveyor belts. The department did not accept the contention of the appellant on the ground that the Polyster film was not used as raw materia....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case of CCE v. Weldekar Laminates Pvt. Ltd. reported in 1990 (49) E.L.T. 538 and in the case of CCE v. Formica India Division reported in 1991 (51) E.L.T. 370. Citing the above two cases and relying upon the ratio of the decisions in these two cases, the Id. Advocate submitted that their case is fully covered by the decision of the Tribunal in these two cases. 4. Shri B.D. Bhagat, the I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be construed either an apparatus of an equipment or an appliance. Even going by the normal understanding of the aforesaid terms, the Bench is unable to be convinced that these films should be construed as apparatus, equipment or appliance. Moreover, seeing the samples of the films produced before usage or in lamination and after usage, the film loses its identity completely and becomes akin to a ....