2002 (1) TMI 1122

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty amount of Rs. 5,61,407.57 and penalty of Rs. 5,000/-, I take up the appeal itself with the consent of both the sides. 2. The above amount of duty has been confirmed against the appellants by denying them the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of capital goods received in their factory in t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....capital goods. 3. Shri S.P. Ghosh, ld. Consultant appearing for the appellants, submits that the authorities below have wrongly relied upon the Board's Circular No. 88/88/94-CX., dated 26-12-94 inasmuch as the said circular only debars the utilisation of credit. In any case, the entire exercise is revenue neutral inasmuch as the availed credit account becomes admissible to them on installa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r case that they have already started the production by using the said capital goods. 4. Shri A.K. Mondal, ld. JDR appearing for the Revenue strongly relies upon the Board's Circular referred supra. He submits that in terms of provisions of Rule 57Q, the appellant was entitled to take credit only after installation of the machineries. They have taken credit in the year 1994 when the machin....