ORDER
Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)
1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the extension of capital goods credit of Rs. 80,47,576/- on items such as power distribution board, electrical motors, etc., used for power transmission in the factory of the respondents who are manufacturers of manmade filament yarn. The period of dispute is November, 1994 to June, 1995.
2. We have heard both sides. The details of the goods on which credit has been disallowed are as under:
i. Power Distribution Board / HT Switchboard / Panel Board / Control and Relay Panel:- These are electrical apparatus for switching or projective electrical circuits or for making connections or in electrical circuits – amount of credit involved is Rs. 32,603/-;
ii. Voltage Stabiliser and Static Converter – amount of credit involved is Rs. 27,230/-;
iii. Circuit Breaker Isolator / Junction Box / Electric Switches and Fuses – amount of credit involved is Rs. 3,04,195/-;
iv. Electrical Motors – amount of credit involved is Rs. 1,70,315/-;
v. Welding Electrode – these are used for fusing the pipeline ends for joining them with fittings – amount of credit involved is Rs. 45,794/-;
vi. 200 KVAR Capacitor Panel – these are used for monitoring / improving the power – amount of credit involved is Rs. 1,42,000/-;
vii. Motor Control Centre – these are used to control local / raw start and stop operation – amount of credit involved is Rs. 2,15,258/-
viii. Bus Duct – used and required for power distribution purposes – amount of credit involved is Rs. 78,189/-
ix. Safety Valves – used for controlling flow of various media at various locations – amount of credit involved is Rs. 3,515/-;
x. Push Button Station – amount of credit involved is Rs. 14,805/-;
xi. 132 KV Switchyard – it is essentially used for power transmission – amount of credit involved is Rs. 3,42,740/-
xii. Pump — used for sending out media at required pressure to the yarn producing location – amount of credit involved is Rs. 5,414/-.
3. From the above it is clear that all the items are either electrical equipments or used for producing or processing goods and therefore covered under the definition of capital goods even prior to 16/03/1995, in the light of the apex Court judgment in the case of CCE v. Jawahar Mills Ltd. 2001 (132) ELT 3 (SC).
4. The other objection of the Revenue is that certain amount of credit had been availed on capital goods prior to the actual commencement of production in the factory. We note that prohibition on availment of credit prior to commencement of actual production was introduced on 26/12/1994 and circulated in the form of a Trade Notice dated 9th February, 1995 and since production commenced on 23/01/1995, credit cannot be denied on this ground. We therefore hold that the respondents are entitled to extension of credit availed on prior to commencement of production.
5. In the result we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.
