Shri Jamshri Ranjitsinghji Spg. and Vs. Commissioner Central Excise and - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....crane it can be considered to be movable property or it can be considered to be immovable property if it can be erected at site of permanently fastened to the earth. thus the matter has to go for verification. therefore in respect of this crane, i remand the matter back to the assessing authority to check up whether such a crane is movable one or as indicated by me as fastened to the earth. except erection crane which is rs.2,080/-, in respect of the other matters they stand allowed setting aside the impugned orders. as far as the erection crane is concerned as held earlier, i remand the matter to adjudicating authority for redetermination as indicated above order.consequential relief if any according to law adjudicating authority for redetermination as indicated above. consequential relief if any according to law.

Judgment:

1. The question involved in this appeal is whether Control Panels Distribution Boards, Switch Board Panel, Capacitor, Air Compressor, Starter digital Auto Span, Erection Crane, Bust Duct etc. do qualify as Capital Goods under Rule 57Q and would be eligible for Modvat Credit? 2. The representative of the party fairly concedes that in respect of erection crane that it cannot be granted the benefit of the Rule 57 Q.He invited our attention to the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore Vs. Surya Roshni Ltd. [2001 (128) ELT 293 (Tri.-LB)] which affirms the judgement of the Tribunal in Jawahar Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore [1999 (108) ELT 47 (Tribunal)].

3. As far as the erection crane is concerned he invited my attention to the Division Bench judgement of the Madras High Court in the case of SIV Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore [2001 (129) ELT 48 (Mad.).

4. I have considered the submissions in paragraph 20 of the High Court Judgement which reads as under: "Where the Court refers to facilities other than land and building which are properly capable of being regarded. He says that crane may not come within the goods. This erection crane will come under the term capital goods and it is capable of being regarded as goods in terms of the said judgement".

I doubt whether the said argument can be accepted because erection crane it can be considered to be movable property or it can be considered to be immovable property if it can be erected at site of permanently fastened to the earth. Thus the matter has to go for verification. Therefore in respect of this crane, I remand the matter back to the assessing authority to check up whether such a crane is movable one or as indicated by me as fastened to the earth. Except erection crane which is Rs.2,080/-, in respect of the other matters they stand allowed setting aside the impugned orders. As far as the erection crane is concerned as held earlier, I remand the matter to adjudicating authority for redetermination as indicated above order.

Consequential relief if any according to law adjudicating authority for redetermination as indicated above. Consequential relief if any according to law.