Commissioner Of Central Excise, NAGPUR v. MANIKGARH CEMENT LTD.
2005-08-23
B.P.SINGH, S.H.KAPADIA
body2005
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT 1.We have heard counsel for the parties. 2.Special leave granted. 3. We are of the view that this matter is covered by our judgment in Birla Corpn. Ltd. v. CCEI so far as MODVAT credit in respect of capital goods is e concerned, such as ropeways, which connect the mines with the factory. We notice that there were some other disputes also regarding welding electrodes, oxygen and other gases, and lubricants, etc. However, in the appeals the only question on which the judgment and order of1:EOAT has been challenged is the admissibility of MODVAT credit in respect of capital goods, namely, ropeways. 4. We, therefore, allow these appeals in terms of the aforesaid judgment without expressing any opinion as to the availability of MODVAT credit on the other items which formed the subject-matter of dispute before CEOAT, but the decision of CEOAT in relation thereto has not been challenged in these appeals. 5.The appeals are accordingly allowed. 6.No orders as to costs.