CCE Vs. M.R. KRISHNAMURTHY CO-OPERATIVE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The assessee took Modvat credit of duty paid to the extent of Rs. 5,82,400/ - on certain items of capital goods, namely. Horizontal spindle, two bearings mill stage and back pressure impulse type steam turbine falling under Chapter sub -heading 8406,10 of the CETA Schedule, The said capital goods were used for generating steam which was, in turn, used to generate electricity. A part of the electricity so produced was used captivity for the manufacture of the final product and the remaining part was supplied outside the factory. The department wanted to disallow the credit on two grounds, firstly that the turbine assembly was an immovable non -excisable property and secondly, that the electricity generated by using it was a non -excisable item and a part thereof was used outside the factory. The show -cause notice issued in this behalf came to be adjudicated upon by the original authority in favour of the Revenue. The decision of the original authority was set aside by the first appellate authority, Hence this appeal of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).

(2.) After examining the records and hearing both sides, I find that the decision of Id. Commissioner (Appeals) is well -founded on binding case law. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has elaborately dealt with each and every issue and has rendered decision in keeping with case law. None of the decisions followed by him has been distinguished in the present appeal, nor has the appellant -Revenue brought on record any better case law. The impugned order is affirmed and the appeal is rejected. (Order dictated and pronounced in open Court).