1985 (4) TMI 282

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y them that they were not entitled to benefit under the said notification and action was, therefore, proposed to be taken in that regard. They sent reply claiming benefit of the notification. On adjudication the Collector, Central Excise, Nagpur passed the order dated 7-10-1980 holding that they were not entitled to benefit under the said notification. The said order was confirmed on appeal to the Central Board of Excise and Customs under order dated 13-3-1981. The Revision Petition against the same to the government has been received on transfer and is being disposed of as an appeal before this Tribunal. 2. We have heard Shri C.L. Beri, Advocate, for the appellants and Shri K.D. Tayal, Senior Departmental Representative, for the respond....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tment, only the face value of the investment at the time when such investment was made shall be taken into account, but the value of the investment made on plant and machinery which have been removed permanently from the industrial unit or rendered unfit for any use shall be excluded from such determination." The contention of Shri Beri is that this explanation is merely clarificatory in nature and would show that even under the earlier notification the calculation of the value of the capital investment will have to be worked out in the manner provided under this explanation though Explanation I to the earlier Notification No. 89/79-CE had not contained such a provision. On the other hand, Shri Tayal supports the reasoning in the order o....