2014 (2) TMI 1099

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1944 has been filed against the judgment and order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 01.05.2008 in Excise Appeal No. E/432/2007. The appeal has already been admitted vide order dated 08.03.2010. The facts of the case has been noted by the Tribunal in its judgment and order dated 01.05.2008 which needs no repetition except few facts as noted hereinbelow:- The appellant has received capital goods during the period from September 2004 to April, 2005 and have taken CENVAT credit of duty paid on the capital goods. The dispute relates only to one machine which was imported by the assessee which was used for manufacture of pulp based product, namely, 'Maaza' which is exempt from whole of the dut....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... dutiable products only after modification. He submits that although a certificate dated 04.01.2007 from the manufacture was filed before the authorities but he submits that to make things clear the appellant now obtained another certificate dated 25.09.2009 which has been annexed alongwith supplementary affidavit in this appeal which clearly provides that no such modification can be done in India since machines are manufactured in Germany and imported in India. He submits that Tribunal mistook minor adjustment as minor modification, whereas the minor adjustment in machine is not any modification in the machine. He further submits that it is admitted fact that from October, 2006 the appellant has used machine for manufacture of dutiable goo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....empted goods as well as dutiable goods. Dutiable goods were manufactured since October, 2006 which fact has been noted in Paragraph No. 8 of the judgment of the Tribunal. The Tribunal had denied the benefit on the pretext that " the certificate of the manufacturer relied upon by the appellant also confirms that the plant is usable for manufacture of aerated waters only after modification". The certificate which was relied upon by the appellant before the authorities dated 04.01.2007 was to the following effect as under:- "This is to confirm that the Krones PET line installed and operating at Barielly at the fruit juice Maaza plant and the Filler VP-L-PET is designed to handle carbonated/aerated soft drinks. This is achieved by software c....