THREADS (INDIA) LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Asstt. Commissioner while adjudicating the case held that -

(2.) ON appeal, ld. Commissioner (Appeals) held as under :

(3.) THE facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of sewing threads. They availed Modvat credit on certain inputs. The Department alleged that the appellants had not filed declaration under Rule 57T of the Central Excise Rules. The items in dispute were electric motor, flange, distance piece. The appellants submitted that they had described in their declaration of the goods as electric motors classifiable under Chapter heading 85.01; that electric motors classifiable under Chapter Heading 85.01 are capital goods; that electric motors are correctly classifiable under Chapter Heading 85.01 and not under Chapter Heading 8448.90; that they have purchased these electric motors from M/s. Lohia Starlinger Ltd.; that they were not answerable if the manufacturer of the inputs had classified them under Chapter Heading 84.48; that misdeclaration by the manufacturer cannot be the basis for denying Modvat credit; that the appellants had made declaration and filed the same; that receipt of the electric motors from the suppliers is not disputed; that distance piece was described as spacer; that since there was no error in so far as description of the goods is concerned, therefore, the question of imposition of penalty did not arise. The appellants, therefore, prayed that the appeal may be allowed.