TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (3) TMI 454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatic convertor, safety torch, FRP tank for HBR scrubber, vertical flame arrestor, cryocan container, cylinder, regulator, S.S. platform, Hepofilter, tower packings (Pall Rings), Bin (Tanks) and rupture disc. The total amount of Modvat credit denied on these items was of the order of Rs. 7,40,005.35. 2. Shri V. Sridharan, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants submits that the detailed functions of these items were explained to the lower authorities. He submits that he is not pressing Modvat credit on cement and hardner. 3. Insofar as electrical equipments are concerned, he submits that electrical equipments comprised of cables, printed circuit, motor control central panel, control box, distribution board/exhaust fan,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Counsel submits that safety torch on which Modvat credit has been denied as a flame proof torch and is required to check inside the reactor. He submits that it is an integral part of the equipment for the plant and, therefore, Modvat credit may be allowed on this item. 8. FRP Tank for HBR Scrubber - the learned Counsel submits that this item is used for storage of vapour of toxic/ hazardous solvents and is covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Metrochem Industries v. C.C.E., [1997 (96) E.L.T. 114]. 9. Vertical Flame Arrestor - the learned Counsel submits that this item is used to prevent entry of flame inside the storage tanks and thus is an intergral part of the plant and is eligible for Modvat credit un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....achine and is covered by the explanation under Rule 57Q. 16. The ld. Advocate submits that the appellants were disallowed Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 55,538.30 on the ground that Modvat credit was taken on the original copy of the duty paying documents. He submits that this Tribunal in the case of Ganeshwar Sugar Mills Limited v. C.C.E., Meerut [1997 (92) E.L.T. 203] held that "On reading of sub-rule (3) of Rule 57T, it is also clear that there is no emphasis of production of duplicate invoice, as there is mention only of the goods being received under the cover of invoice or a Bill of Entry. In absence of these documents, any assessee can produce any other document as may be specified under Rule 57G. In the present case, origina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re used for any of the above three purposes will be capital goods under Rule 57Q. He submits that according to the principle of 'Noscitur a sociis', that is, the words are to be interpreted according to the company which they keep. He submits that this Tribunal in the case of Tractors and Farm Equipment Limited [1993 (68) E.L.T. 234] held that "The word 'drawings' is used in association with the words, 'works of arts'. According to the principle of interpretation of 'Noscitur a Sociis' is that the words are to be interpreted according to the company which they keep. Hence, the word "drawings" has to be interpreted in line with the meaning of the preceding phrase "Works of Arts" which would refer to the word 'Drawings' as used in Art and not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e submits that FRP Tanks for HBR Scrubber, Vertical Flame Aresstor, Cryocan Container and Cylinder/Regulator, S.S. Platform, Hepafilter, Tower Packing (Pall Rings), Bin (Tanks) and Rupture Disc have either no role to play or function part of the structure or do not part take in the production, process or bringing about any change in the final products and, therefore, the lower authorities have rightly denied Modvat credit on these itmes. 21. Heard the submissions of both sides. We note that a lot of reliance was placed on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Shanmugaraja Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. We also find that similar issue had come up for decision before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Industrial Machinery ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt and hardner, safety torch and S.S. platform, all other items are the inputs inasmuch as without the use of these items it was not practicable for the manufacturer to manufacture the pharmaceutical goods. We further find that the appellants have also relied upon the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Rajasthan State Chemicals Works [1991 (55) E.L.T. 444 (SC)]. We find in the judgment of the Supreme Court that the process itself may consist of several processes which may or may not bring about any change at every intermediate stage, but the activity or the operation may be so integrally connected with final result of the production of a commercially different article, therefore, any activity or the operation which is essential require....