TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 96
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....judicating authority denied the Cenvat Credit holding that the Molecular Sieve were found to be used as packing of process vessel wherein these are used to separate hydrocarbons and other mixtures by selective occlusion of one or more of constituents, which is a process of sieving, employed for segregation if different fractions. Since these Molecular Sieve are used in the process vessel for considerable length of time, it falls in the category of equipment/appliance/apparatus for production/processing of goods/bringing about any change in any substance in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products. Since such equipment/appliance/apparatus are excluded from the expression 'inputs' by explanation under Rule 57A, no Modva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... & Cus. Baroda 1998 (100) E.L.T. 360 (Tribunal) (iii) Residency Foods & Beverages Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex., Allahabad 1998 (101) E.L.T. 103 (Tribunal) (iv) Cans & Closures Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Ex. 1991 (56) E.L.T. 474 (Tribunal), Upheld by Supreme Court Collector Vs. Cans and Closures Ltd. 1995 (78) E.L.T. A 138 (S.C.) (v) Collector of Central Ex., Calcutta-Il Vs. Bajoria Rubber Industries 1996 (84) E.L.T. 45 (Tribunal) (vi) Leader Engg. Works Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., Chandigarh 1996 (88) E.L.T. 38 (Tribunal) 1996 (83) E.L.T. 72 (Tribunal) (vii) Joy Foam Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central excise, Madras 1996 (83) E.L.T. 72 (Tribunal) (viii) Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore Vs. Flex Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 2002 (14....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gesh Jhalla Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nasik 2016-TIOL-2550-CESTAT-MUM (ii) M/s. CJ Shah and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rajkot 2014-TIOL-1412-CESTAT-AHM 4. On the other hand, Shri V.K. Agarwal Ld. Additional Commissioner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. To decide whether goods in question i.e. "Sodium Silico Aluminate" which is a "Molecular Sieve" is input or otherwise, it is necessary to understand the use and process of manufacture, in the course of which the same is used. Therefore the process of manufacture of final products i.e. LAB is as follows: 2.2 The process of manufactur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contended by the adjudicating authority, by any stretch of imagination it cannot be said this Sodium Silico Aluminate is either any equipment/ appliance/ apparatus of the plant, machinery of the appellant. It is admittedly a chemical and used during the course of manufacture, therefore in our considered view it is an input. Though the various judgments cited by Ld. Counsel supports the case of the appellant but in particular, in their own case reported as Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE 2004 (178) E.L.T.529 on the identical goods i.e Molecular Sieve, the modvat credit was allowed. The relevant part of the order is reproduced below: "III. Molecular Sieves . III(a) The relevant portion of the Commissioner (Appeals) order denying....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ught to have been granted under Rule 57A. Declaration filed in terms of Rule 57Q is sufficient for the purposes of extending the credit, under Rule 57A for Molecular Sieves. This submission is fully supported by the decision of Larger Bench in CCE v. Modi Rubber - 2000 (119) E.L.T. 197 and the decision of CEGAT in the case of Devyani Beverages Limited v. CCE - 1999 (113) E.L.T. 503. Further, the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Flex Chemicals - 2002 (147) E.L.T. 508 allowed Modvat credit on Molecular Sieve as input though assessee claimed Molecular Sieves to be capital goods. The Tribunal followed the decision of Larger Bench in the case of Modi Rubber cited supra. In view of the above, the credit taken on Molecular Sieves is allowable." F....