Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Collector of Central Excise Vs. Coolade Beverages Ltd.

Collector of Central Excise vs Coolade Beverages Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Jun 23, 1997
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/11416

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Collector of Central Excise

Respondent

Coolade Beverages Ltd.

Legal References

Reported In
(1998)(99)ELT349TriDel

Excerpt

1. the revenue is aggrieved by the order of the commissioner (appeals), customs and central excise, ghaziabad extending the benefit of modvat credit of rs. 4,333/- on electronic weighing machines connected with the conveyor belt of the bottling plant of the respondents who are manufacturers of beverages, holding that this item comes within the purview of the meaning of 'capital goods' under rule 57q of the central excise rules, 1944. the respondents used micro controlled electronic weighing machines to ensure correct weight of each ingredient such as sugar, essence, syrup, etc. to the last milligram which is very essential to ensure 100% taste of the cold drinks manufactured by them and after weighment, the ingredients are sent to the bottling plant where a high speed washing machine and filling machine are installed and the whole process carried out continuously.2. the lower appellate authority has held that the disputed item was covered by clause 1(c) of the explanation to rule 57q by treating them in the nature of weigh bridges and it is against this finding, that the revenue has filed the present appeal on the ground that weigh bridges are different and distinct from weighing machines.3. while agreeing with the department that weighing machines cannot be equated with weigh bridges, i find that the disputed item is covered by clause 1(b) (sic) of the explanation to rule 57q as the electronic weighing machines can be regarded as components or accessories of the bottling plant which in turn, are admittedly of producing goods viz.cold drinks and therefore, the credit is available to the respondents on this item. in the result, i hold that the respondents are entitled to the benefit of credit of rs. 4,333/- on electronic weighing machines. the appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

Full Judgment

1. The Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Ghaziabad extending the benefit of Modvat credit of Rs. 4,333/- on Electronic Weighing Machines connected with the conveyor belt of the bottling plant of the respondents who are manufacturers of beverages, holding that this item comes within the purview of the meaning of 'capital goods' under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The respondents used Micro Controlled Electronic Weighing machines to ensure correct weight of each ingredient such as sugar, essence, syrup, etc. to the last milligram which is very essential to ensure 100% taste of the cold drinks manufactured by them and after weighment, the ingredients are sent to the bottling plant where a high speed washing machine and filling machine are installed and the whole process carried out continuously.

2. The lower Appellate authority has held that the disputed item was covered by Clause 1(c) of the Explanation to Rule 57Q by treating them in the nature of weigh bridges and it is against this finding, that the Revenue has filed the present appeal on the ground that weigh bridges are different and distinct from weighing machines.

3. While agreeing with the department that weighing machines cannot be equated with weigh bridges, I find that the disputed item is covered by Clause 1(b) (sic) of the Explanation to Rule 57Q as the Electronic Weighing machines can be regarded as components or accessories of the bottling plant which in turn, are admittedly of producing goods viz.

cold drinks and therefore, the credit is available to the respondents on this item. In the result, I hold that the respondents are entitled to the benefit of credit of Rs. 4,333/- on Electronic weighing machines. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial