CCE Vs. HERO CYCLES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal, the Revenue has contested the correctness of the impugned order -in -original, dropping the recovery of the modvat credit, against the respondents.

(2.) WE have heard both sides. The Revenue has sought to deny the modvat credit to the respondents on the goods in question on the ground that these were inputs and the credit should have been taken as such and not by treating the same as 'Capital Goods'.

(3.) WE have gone through the record and we find that there is no tangible evidence to substantiate the stand of the Revenue. The goods in question could not be said to be inputs as the same were parts of the Capital Goods installed in the factory premises of the respondents. The respondents had even filed the declaration, declaring the goods as parts of the Capital goods, before availing the modvat credit. The learned Commissioner in the impugned order has recorded detailed reasons for holding the goods as parts of the Capital Goods, and we do not find any sufficient ground to disagree with his findings.