TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (9) TMI 778
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - This appeal of the Revenue is against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) allowing Modvat credit to the respondents on certain parts of electric motors under Rule 57Q for the periods November, 1998 and April, 1999. 2. The respondents had procured electric motors originally from M/s. Kirloskar Electric Co. Ltd. for the purpose of running....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same Rule. The appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the original authority was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal of the Revenue. 3. Ld. JDR reiterates the grounds of the appeal and emphasizes the fact that the goods in question were not brought as such into the assessee's factory. According to the DR, the respondents ought to have brought the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces issued under Rule 52A by Kirloskar. This was in accordance with the provisions of Rule 57Q. Ld. Advocate, further, reiterates the findings contained in Para 10 of the impugned order and submits that the respondents were entitled to take Modvat credit on the parts of electric motors in terms of Sl. No. 5 of the Table annexed to Rule 57Q(1). 5. I have examined the submissions. It has bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner (Appeals) has rendered a well-reasoned decision in Para 10 of his order, extracted below :- "10. I find that the Dy. Commissioner, Central Excise, Division-Muzaffarnagar was not correct in holding that the party was not eligible for said credit on the replaced parts of the motors. DC motor was covered under Heading 85.01 which was specifically covered under the definition of capital....