TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (6) TMI 168
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Respondent. [Order]. - In this bunch of three cases, the appellants herein in two cases claimed the benefit of Modvat credit of duty paid on welding rods and lubricating oil as inputs under Rule 57A. In one of the appeals however, they claimed the Modvat credit on the aforesaid two commodities as capital goods under Rule 57Q. The original authority rejected the first two cases on the ground t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellants have claimed the Modvat credit as capital goods. At this stage, ld. Advocate for the appellants submit that this is a factual mistake committed by the lower authority. Their claim was for Modvat credit as inputs and not as capital goods. Third case was also rejected because the lower appellate authority held that these are inputs and not capital goods, and hence the claim of the appell....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....odvat credit. He, therefore, prays for allowing the three appeals with consequential relief to the appellants. 4. Opposing the contentions ld. JDR Shri A.M. Tilak for the revenue submits that the lower appellate authority has committed an error in passing the order by proceeding on the premise that a common issue is involved in these three appeals namely denial of Modvat credit on welding ro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eas advanced from both the sides. I am impressed by the plea of the ld. Advocate for the appellants that a very categorical finding has been given by the lower appellate authority that Modvat credit is admissible on both the products involved herein namely `welding rods' and `lubricant' under Rule 57A and that the revenue has not challenged this finding by filing an appeal. Therefore, his further ....