CCE, JAIPUR Vs. DLF CEMENT LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the Revenue against the Order dt. 31.7.2000 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jaipur. The Commissioner (Appeals) in this order has upheld the order passed by the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jodhpur allowing the modvat credit to the Respondents on the 'Pollution control equipment' as capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The amount of the modvat credit involved in this case is Rs. 1,27,228/ -. I have heard Shri R.C. Sankhla, JDR for the appellants and Shri M.P. Devnath, Advocate for the Respondents. It is observed in the written memorandum of appeal filed by the Revenue that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Indian Farmers Fertilizer Co -operative Ltd. (IFFCO) v. CCE, Ahmedabad - - : 1996 (86) ELT 177 (SC) : 1996 (66) ECR 1 (SC), have held that pollution control apparatus/devices used in a plant is to be treated as part and parcel of manufacturing process. However, the ratio of the said judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is sought to be distinguished by the Revenue on the grounds that in that case the issue before the Supreme Court was whether raw naphtha used in the manufacture of ammonia which in turn is used in the treatment of effluents from the urea plant was also eligible for exemption under Notfn. No. 187/61 -CE. It is also contended by the ld. JDR that the scope of the availability of modvat credit on the 'capital goods' under Rule 57Q is pending before the Supreme Court in the appeal filed by the Revenue in the Jawahar Mills case [see : 2000 (90) ECR 387 (T -LB)]. It is therefore submitted that the decision on the issue may be kept in abeyance pending judgment of the Apex Court in the said appeal. I have considered these submissions. In my view so far as the question of use of the plant and machinery for pollution control in a particular manufacturing process is concerned, that stands fully defined in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. IFFCO (supra). It is admitted in the Revenue appeal itself that the Supreme Court in the said judgment has held that pollution control apparatus/devices used in a plant or machinery is to be treated as part and parcel of the manufacturing process under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the modvat credit in respect of the duty paid on the plant and machinery used in the manufacturing process of a particular product is admissible. Therefore, the proposition in the present case is fully covered by the ratio of the afore -stated judgment of the Apex Court in M/s. IFFCO. Consequently, there is no force in the Revenue appeal and the same is accordingly, rejected.