ORDER
Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)
1. For the reasons recorder below we waive the pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 1,10,550 and penalty of Rs. One lakh and stay recovery thereof and dispose of the appeal itself at this stage.
2. Credit of Rs. 61,200 has been denied on the ground that this amount of credit has been taken by the appellants on the basis of the invoices which were not in their favour. Our attention has been drawn by the Ld. Counsel for the appellants to 2 invoices in question clearly showing despatch to M/s. Voltas Ltd. A/c. Hindustan Lever Limited (the appellant). Therefore, these invoices are not in the category of endorsed invoices as held by-the Commissioner in the impugned order and they are documents which are valid duty paid documents for the purpose of credit as held by the Tribunal in the case of Larsen & Toubro Limited v. CCE . Obviously, there is no dispute regarding the receipt of the goods on their part. Following the ratio of the judgment of the Tribunal cited, we hold that this amount of credit is admissible to the appellants. A further amount of Rs. 49,350 has been denied on the ground that this is the credit taken on storage tanks which are not capital goods within the meaning of Rule 57Q and hence not covered by Notfn. No. 67/95 which exempts capital goods as defined in Rule 57Q manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production. We find that the storage tanks are covered under the definition of capital goods having been manufactured in the factory of the appellants and used captively. Therefore, they would be covered by exemption in terms of the Notification.
3. In the result we hold that the entire amount of credit of duty involved in the present case is available to the appellants. Hence, we set aside the order of denial of credit and imposition of penalty and allow the appeal.