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.

international Transformers (P) Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

international Transformers (P) vs Commr. of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 05, 1998
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/12995

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

international Transformers (P)

Respondent

Commr. of C. Ex.

Legal References

Reported In
(1998)(103)ELT61TriDel

Excerpt

.....whether the transformer oil supplied with the transformers is eligible to modvat credit or not. the department alleged that the transformer oil was not eligible to modvat credit inasmuch as transformer oil is put into transformer only after the manufacture of transformer was complete. the transformer oil acted as coolant and cannot be regarded as an input in terms of rule 57a. the ld. counsel cites and relies upon the decision of this tribunal in the case of ngef limited v. cce [1996 (87) e.l.t. 722] and in the case of same company reported in 1995 (77) e.l.t. 238. the ld counsel submits that in their case the transformer oil was filled in the transformer before its clearance and, therefore in terms of decision of south regional bench of this tribunal, they were entitled to the benefit of modvat credit of duty paid transformer oil. he also contends that the value of transformer oil is included in the value of transformer for the purpose of levy of duty on transformer.2. opposing the request for dispensing with pre-deposit of duty, shri sanjeev srivastava, ld. jdr submits that the manufacture of transformer is complete before transformer oil is filled in the transformer. he submits that the impugned order does not show that the transformer oil was filled in the transformer after the manufacture of the transformer but before its clearance. he, therefore, prays that the applicants may be directed to deposit the entire amount of duty.3. heard the submissions of both sides. on careful consideration of the evidence placed before me and submission made, i find that the entire issue is arguable and there is no finding on the issue whether the transformer oil was filled in the transformer at the time of clearance or not. having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, i direct the applicants to deposit a sum of rs. 25,000/- on or before 5-5-1998 and report compliance on 12-5-1998.4. on compliance of this order, recovery/balance amount of duty shall remain stayed.....

Full Judgment

1. Shri T.K. Srivastava, ld. Advocate arguing for dispensing the pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 81,013,02 (sic) submits that the applicants are engaged in the manufacture of electrical transformers. A dispute arose whether the transformer oil supplied with the transformers is eligible to Modvat credit or not. The Department alleged that the transformer oil was not eligible to Modvat credit inasmuch as transformer oil is put into transformer only after the manufacture of transformer was complete. The transformer oil acted as coolant and cannot be regarded as an input in terms of Rule 57A. The ld. Counsel cites and relies upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of NGEF Limited v. CCE [1996 (87) E.L.T. 722] and in the case of same company reported in 1995 (77) E.L.T. 238. The ld Counsel submits that in their case the transformer oil was filled in the transformer before its clearance and, therefore in terms of decision of South Regional Bench of this Tribunal, they were entitled to the benefit of Modvat credit of duty paid transformer oil. He also contends that the value of transformer oil is included in the value of transformer for the purpose of levy of duty on transformer.

2. Opposing the request for dispensing with pre-deposit of duty, Shri Sanjeev Srivastava, ld. JDR submits that the manufacture of transformer is complete before transformer oil is filled in the transformer. He submits that the impugned order does not show that the transformer oil was filled in the transformer after the manufacture of the transformer but before its clearance. He, therefore, prays that the applicants may be directed to deposit the entire amount of duty.

3. Heard the submissions of both sides. On careful consideration of the evidence placed before me and submission made, I find that the entire issue is arguable and there is no finding on the issue whether the transformer oil was filled in the transformer at the time of clearance or not. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the applicants to deposit a sum of Rs. 25,000/- on or before 5-5-1998 and report compliance on 12-5-1998.

4. On compliance of this order, recovery/balance amount of duty shall remain stayed during the pendency of the appeal.

5. Non-deposit of this amount shall lead to dismissal of the appeal without any further notice.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial