(1.) IN these two appeals filed by M/s. Jaypee Bela Plant, arising out of a common Order -in -Original No. 378 -380/2002, dated 15 -5 -2002, the issue involved is about the eligibility of certain items to Modvat credit under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
(2.) SHRI V. Lakshmikumaran, learned Advocate, submitted that the Appellants manufacture cement and avail of Modvat credit of duty paid on the inputs and capital goods; that the Commissioner, under the impugned Order has disallowed the Modvat credit on certain capital goods during the period from August, 1996 to November, 1997 on the ground that the capital goods are used in the mines and that some of the goods are not covered under the definition of capital goods under Rule 57Q during the relevant period. We also heard Shri V. Valte, learned Senior Departmental Representative for Revenue. The submissions made by both the learned Advocate and the learned Senior Departmental Representative and our findings are as under : -
(3.) DUMPER , Hydraulic Excavator, etc. 3.1 The learned Advocate submitted that the dumper is used for transportation of limestone from the mines to their factory; that the Modvat credit has been denied on the ground that transfer of limestone from the mines to the manufacturing plant in the dumpers has got nothing to do with the manufacture of the final product; that in terms of Rule 57Q, the Credit is allowed if the capital goods has been used in the factory of the manufacture; that the dumpers have been used in the factory as the crusher is installed at the factory and the dumpers bring the limestone from the mines to the factory and unload the same in the crushers; that thus the condition in the Rule, regarding the use of the capital goods in the factory of the manufacturer is satisfied; that in the case of Jaypee Rewa Plant v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur, the Tribunal vide Final Order No. A/86 -87/2002 -NB, dated 8 -1 -2002 has allowed the credit on the dumpers. Reliance has also been placed on the decisions in Malabar Cements Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Cochin, [2002 (149) E.L.T. 751 (T) = 2002 (48) RLT 828 (CEGAT)] and ACC Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur - 1999 (108) E.L.T. 169 (T).