Jay Electric Ltd. Vs. Collr. of Central Excise and

Jay Electric Ltd. vs Collr. of Central Excise and

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Nov 29, 1994

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/7994

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/7994
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On: Nov 29, 1994
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

Jay Electric Ltd.

Respondent

Collr. of Central Excise and

Legal References

Reported In: (1995)(76)ELT92Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. for hearing the applicants' appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of rs. 5,32.044.25 towards duty vide order in appeal no.pcj-210/srt/94 (f. no. v-2(81)224/srt/94, dated 7-10-1994. the issue relates to denial of modvat credit on moly wire used as mandrel for making tungsten filament. this has been held to be an appliance following the decision of this bench in the case of m/s. apar ltd. 2. shri w. christian, the ld. advocate, appearing for the applicants, refers to the board's clarification contained in f. no. 267/63/91-cd.8, dated 30-12-1992, wherein the board have clarified that moly wire is to be considered as a consumable and not as a tool or appliance, since it is capable of only one time use and in that view modvat credit is held to be admissible as a consumable. shri christian pleads that in view of the clarification of the boards, the authorities are presently allowing modvat benefit.3. after hearing both the sides, though we held the issue in favour of the revenue, in view of the board's clarification which is reportedly available to all the assessees, denial of modvat credit it in this case would not be justified prima facie. hence, we grant stay and waiver of recovery of the duty amount.

Full Judgment

1. For hearing the applicants' appeal on merits, they are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,32.044.25 towards duty vide order in appeal No.PCJ-210/SRT/94 (F. No. V-2(81)224/SRT/94, dated 7-10-1994. The issue relates to denial of Modvat credit on moly wire used as Mandrel for making tungsten filament. This has been held to be an appliance following the decision of this Bench in the case of M/s. Apar Ltd. 2. Shri W. Christian, the ld. advocate, appearing for the applicants, refers to the Board's clarification contained in F. No. 267/63/91-CD.8, dated 30-12-1992, wherein the Board have clarified that moly wire is to be considered as a consumable and not as a tool or appliance, since it is capable of only one time use and in that view Modvat credit is held to be admissible as a consumable. Shri Christian pleads that in view of the clarification of the Boards, the authorities are presently allowing Modvat benefit.

3. After hearing both the sides, though we held the issue in favour of the Revenue, in view of the Board's clarification which is reportedly available to all the assessees, denial of Modvat credit it in this case would not be justified prima facie. Hence, we grant stay and waiver of recovery of the duty amount.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Jay Electric Ltd. vs Collr. of Central Excise and Same Subject Service Tax