1998 (7) TMI 256

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]. -  The dispute in this case relates to the admissibility of the following items for Modvat credit on capital goods :- 1. Blow Bar 2. Stranded Wire (LCWR) & Bottom covers 3. White K. Accomon L.C. & Fire crete super I have heard Shri Sanjay Khatri, ld. Advocate for the appellants and Shri A.M. Tilak, ld. D.R. for the Revenue. 2.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....E.L.T. 415 in which the Tribunal, relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Indian Corporation Ltd. had held that explosives used in the mines were permissible as inputs, if the same manufacturer was engaged in the mining as well as production of cement. This judgment, which was not cited before the Tribunal in the Madras Cement case, being based on Supreme Court judgment prono....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... However, there are other judgments, which lay down the conditions in which the proximity of the land to the factory has to be judged. In the case of Diamond Cement reported in 1994 (71) E.L.T. 514, the Tribunal had ruled that the distance between two units would be a material factor for determining whether an area was located in the precincts of the factory or not. In neither of the lower procee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....7D, would apply. Ld. Advocate counters the arguments by saying that this is not a ground raised in the show cause notice and cannot be taken at this stage. 4. I find that the cited judgment relates to the interpretation of Notification No. 217/86 and the ratio thereof cannot be applied in the present proceedings. In this case also question of fact is involved and that is, whether the area ....