ORDER
T.P. Nambiar, Member (J)
1. This reference application has been filed by the applicants requiring the Tribunal to refer the following questions of law to the Hon’ble High Court.
1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case CEGAT was right in holding that a M/s. The Singareni Collieries Company Limited is a manufacturer of Dragline who is liable to pay excise duty on the same?
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the CEGAT was right on confirming the confiscation of the Dragline and levy redemption fine of Rs. 1.75 crores particularly in the absence of mens rea and clandestine removal and that too at this distance point of time when the Department had already lost its right to collect the duty?
2. The ld. JDR Shri S. Murugandy stated that these graphite rods and blocks are either apparatus or appliances. On a specific query from the Bench, he stated that they are in the nature of appliances. He also drew our attention to para 15 of the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) and stated he has given reasonings in the order as to why the Modvat benefit was not granted to the respondents.
3. Heard the ld. Advocate Smt. Maithili for the respondents. She stated that the question decided by the Tribunal is only in the nature of question of fact and no law has arisen. She stated that the Interpretative Rule 57A is not involved in this case. It is decided by the Tribunal that these goods are not in the nature of apparatus or appliances. Therefore, she stated that no question of law has arisen in this regard.
4. We have considered the submissions. We find that the Tribunal had held that these goods are used in the medium of transfer. In the order of the Tribunal it is held as follows :-
“But as far as the other items are concerned, we are satisfied with the argument of the learned Advocate that these cannot be termed as appliance or apparatus as they are used as a medium of transfer. In that view of the matter they cannot be considered as appliances or apparatus in which the goods are processed.”
Even in the reference application the department itself has stated that these are used as medium of transfer. Therefore, taking into consideration the use of the goods in question and when the Tribunal has entered a finding of fact, in our view, it cannot be said that a question of law has arisen in this regard. Accordingly, this reference application is rejected.