2008 (12) TMI 566

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....order is being passed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3.1 The learned CA first of all submitted that the review petitions filed by the department before the Commissioner (Appeals) were not maintainable since the Commissioner had directed the Assistant Commissioner to file appeal against the Order-in-Original passed by the Dy. Commissioner. According to Section 35E(2), the Commissioner could have directed only "such authority" who had passed the order. He relied upon the following cases in support of his contention : - (i)      CCE v. Silver Streak Welding Products India Pvt. Ltd. - 2008 (226) E.L.T. 704 (Bom.) (ii)    CCE v. Lloyds Metals & Engineers Ltd. - 2003 (159) E.L.T. 1144 (T) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edit only on the ground that the applicant had not argued this point. Being a legal point, it is his submission that they are eligible. The third category of the capital goods on which the credit has been disallowed are steel sheets, plates, articles of alloy steel, structural part etc. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that these items can be described as raw materials and they cannot be used directly as parts or spares. The learned CA submits that even if Modvat credit is not admissible as capital goods, the credit was admissible as raw materials. Therefore, even if the goods are held to be not capital goods, appellants were eligible to avail credit on inputs in terms of the decision of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Union Car....