Cce Vs. Cosmos Films Ltd.

1. heard both sides. the ld. jdr appearing for the revenue submitted that the issue relates to modvat credit on capital goods. in the present case the goods involved are transformers, electrical control panel, pvc cables, tarpaulin, doors & frames, d.c. drives etc. he submitted that these are the electrical goods they do not quality as capital goods in view of the definition as contained in rule 57a/57q of the central excise rules, 1944. he, therefore, contended that the appeal may be allowed.2. the ld. counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the appellant has already reversed credit on certain goods on which the appellant was not entitled to avail the credit. however as regards the electrical goods they fully qualify as capital goods in view of the decision in the case of jawahar mill ltd. reported in 2001 (132) elt 3 (s.c.) and other decisions as mentioned below: -bihar state export corp ltd. v. cce - 2004 (163) elt 462 (tribunal)g.t.c. industries v. cce 10. s.n. sunderson ltd. v. suptd. c.ex. - 1995 (75) elt 273 (m.p. high court).3. besides, he also contended that in the reply to the show cause notice the appellant has fully explained the usages of the items in question and it has been categorically stated that based on the usages the items are essential for the purpose of or in relation to the manufacture of final product. he further contended that the commissioner (appeals) has in para 5 of his order observed that the adjudicating authority has travelled beyond the scope of the show cause notice. this ground also justifies setting aside of the impugned order.4. after hearing both sides and perusal of the records and the case laws relied on i find the law is well settled and i do not find any reasons to interfere with the order passed by the commissioner (appeals).