ORDER
P.G. Chacko, Member (J)
1. These appeals are by the Revenue. The respondents are manufacturers of cement. During the period August – December, 1995, they constructed a new Cement Mill by using Cement, CTD bars/rods, M.S. Angle, M.S. Plate, M.S. Channels, DDR steel rods etc. They took capital goods credit on these items. The lower appellate authority allowed this credit. Appeal No. 514/04 of the Revenue is against the decision of that authority.
2. In 1996, the respondents undertook expansion of their manufacturing activity. As a part of this project, they used, among other things, three items namely Channel supporter, Cement and Ceramic pipes as components of supporting structure for installation of equipments in the plant. They took capital goods credit on these three items during April – June, 1996, which was allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Appeal No. 517/04 is against this decision of the lower appellate authority.
3. After examining the records and hearing both sides, I find no ground to interfere with the orders passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). In the memorandum of Appeal No. 514/04, the appellant has stated that CTD bars/rods, M.S. angle/plate/channels etc. were used for erection of new cement mill. In the memorandum of the other appeal, it has been categorically admitted that Channel Supporter, Cement and Ceramic pipes were used as parts/components of supporting structure for installation of equipment in the cement mill. Thus, there is no dispute of the fact that the capital goods in question were used as parts/components of cement-manufacturing plant. During the material period, parts and components of ‘plant’ were recognised as eligible capital goods for Modvat credit under Clause (b) of Explanation (1) to Sub-rule (1) of Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The lower appellate authority has rightly allowed capital goods credit to the respondents. Its decision is well supported by case law.
4. The appeals are dismissed.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)