Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Grauer and Weil (i) Ltd.

Commissioner of Central Excise vs Grauer and Weil (i) Ltd.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 11, 2003

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/30622

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/30622
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram
Decided On: Apr 11, 2003
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

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

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Central Excise

Respondent

Grauer and Weil (i) Ltd.

Excerpt

1. the commissioner (appeals), against whose order the revenue has preferred the above appeal has held that capital goods credit of rs. 3,00,247.50 is admissible to the respondents herein who are engaged in the manufacture of electroplating chemicals on testing equipment used for research and development.2. on hearing both sides i find that the issue stands settled in favour of the assessees by the tribunal's order in the case of crompton greaves ltd. v. cce, chandigarh 2002 (139) elt 101 wherein it has been held that capital goods used for testing and r&d are eligible to modvat credit in terms of rule 57q c.e. rules. therefore i see no reason to interfere with the impugned order and accordingly uphold the same and reject the appeal.

Full Judgment

1. The Commissioner (Appeals), against whose order the Revenue has preferred the above appeal has held that capital goods credit of Rs. 3,00,247.50 is admissible to the respondents herein who are engaged in the manufacture of electroplating chemicals on testing equipment used for research and development.

2. On hearing both sides I find that the issue stands settled in favour of the assessees by the Tribunal's order in the case of Crompton Greaves Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh 2002 (139) ELT 101 wherein it has been held that capital goods used for testing and R&D are eligible to modvat credit in terms of Rule 57Q C.E. Rules. Therefore I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order and accordingly uphold the same and reject the appeal.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Commissioner of Central Excise vs Grauer and Weil (i) Ltd. Same Subject Excise Same Judge J Balasundaram