C.C.E, DELHI Vs. HINDUSTAN NATIONAL GLASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondents manufacture glass bottles and glass tumblers falling under Chapter 70 of the Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have been allowed modvat credit totally amounting to Rs. 1,13,293.36 on electric cables and parts of inspection machines as capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi vide Order dt. 20.6.2000 setting aside the Order dt. 23.3.99 passed by the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Rohtak. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also set aside the penalty of Rs. 10,000/ - imposed on the respondents.

(2.) THE Revenue are in appeal against the above order of Commissioner (Appeals). I have heard Shri A.K. Jain, JDR for the Revenue/appellants. This matter was last called on 1.2.2001 when the respondents were represented through Shri R.Pal Singh, Consultant. On that date, the matter stood adjourned to this date in the presence of 1d. Consultant for the respondents. Today, when the matter is called, the respondents are not represented. I have accordingly heard Shri A.K. Jain, JDR for the appellants. I have considered the submissions made before me. It is observed that the matter relating to the madvat credit on the capital goods under Rule 57Q now stands settled by the decision of the Larger Bench of CEGAT in the case of CCE, Indore, vs. Surya Roshni Ltd. reported in 2001 (128) ELT 293 (Tri. -LB). The judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of SIV Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Coimbatore reported in 2001 (129) ELT 48 (Mad.) also has the bearing on the subject. Accordingly, the matter would call for re -consideration by the Original Authority. In the light of ration of these decisions, the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside and the matter remanded to the Original Authority for passing a speaking order on de -novo consideration of the subject in respect of availability of modvat credit on each of these items in the light of the above cited decisions. The respondents shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing before taking the final view in the matter.

(3.) THE Revenue appeal is thus allowed by way of remand in the above terms.