( 1 ) HEARD the learned Counsel. ( 2 ) THE question referred for decision in this case is as follows :- "whether in the facts and circumstances of the case Modvat credit is available in respect of ramming mass used in the lining of the furnace which is used in the manufacture of the notified finished product under Rule 57-A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. " ( 3 ) THE point in question is covered by the earlier Division Bench decision reported in 2000 (120) E. L. T. 75 (Kar.) = 2000 (3) KLJ, 356, wherein the Division Bench held that since this particular substance would ultimately have to be categorized as an input, that the denial of modvat credit on duties paid on these items was not right in law. ( 4 ) IN view of this position, the reference in question is answered in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent department. ( 5 ) THE TRC in question accordingly stands disposed of. No order as to costs.