Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2000 (9) TMI 326

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Assistant Commissioner as per order dated 30-4-1998, which was, later on, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) as per order dated 25-7-1999. The present appeal is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. Carefully examined the grounds of the appeal after perusal of the orders of the lower authorities and connected records. Heard the representative of the appellant-company, Shri N.D. Jain and JDR Shri Y.R. Kilania. 3. Shri Jain has submitted that the orders of the lower authorities are on grounds, some of which are beyond the scope of the show cause notice. The show-cause notice proposed to deny the Modvat credit on boiler on the ground that the final product namely woollen fabric was not covered under Rule 57Q fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Assistant Commissioner, submits ld. Representative of the appellants. He has further prayed for setting aside the order of the lower appellate authority and allowing this appeal. He has also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Meerut v. Triveni Engg. Works [1997 (96) E.L.T. 655 (T)] in support of the submission that the capital goods in question was an integral part of the appellants' plant and therefore was covered by the expression 'capital goods' as per clause (a) under the Explanation to Rule 57Q. 4. Ld. JDR has reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. He has further submitted that the scope of certain notifications amending Rule 57Q from time to time is presently under consideration of the Ape....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the factual basis for the finding. In this connection, it has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that the boiler in question was used for generation of steam which was, in turn, used in various stages of the processing of the fabrics after the powerloom stage of the manufacture. The fabrics coming out of the powerloom are washed with hot water. The hot water required for this purpose is obtained by heating water with the aid of steam. Subsequent to the washing of the fabrics is the milling stage, in which the required temperature is maintained by means of steam. In the subsequent stage of drying of the fabrics in the stenter also, steam is used for attaining the required high temperature. In this manner, steam is an essential ingr....