Judgment:
1. In all these appeals common question of law and facts are involved hence they are all taken up together for disposal as per law.
2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of "Iron and Steel Products" falling under Chapters 72 and 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department alleged contravention of provisions of Rule 57A inasmuch as during the period 1-1-1991 (sic) to 25-3-1991 and from 26-3-1991 to 26-6-1991 in respect of Appeal E/5627/92 and likewise various periods in respective appeals, that they have taken inadmissible Modvat Credit, on account of following items :- 5. Engineering goods like hot tops, minitips, B.P. sets, grinding wheels etc.
3. Accordingly, demand notices were issued to the assessees under Rule 57-1 calling upon them to explain as to why the inadmissible Modvat Credit should not be denied to them. After careful consideration of the reply the lower authorities decided the matter in respect of each of the item. The lower authorities decided the case against the appeals accepted against in the case of welding electrodes.
4. We have heard the Learned Advocate, Shri Pradeep Jain for the appellants and the Learned SDR, Shri Mewa Singh for the Revenue.
5. The appellants submitted that most of the issues are decided and that the appeals could be disposed of in terms of these judgments. He submitted that the judgment in respect of each items are as follows :- He submitted that the issue pertaining to Refractory Bricks has been decided against the party as rendered in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Raipur Steels and therefore, the issue would be decided against the assessees.
The learned Advocate submitted that the issue has been decided in favour of the party by a Larger Bench's decision in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. A.B. Tools Ltd. as reported in 1994 (72) E.L.T. 776 and hence the matter could be decided in their favour.
He submitted that the item is similar to bricks and hence the issue is covered against the assessee.
The Learned Advocate submitted that the Larger Bench as per Final Order No. A/310-314/96-NB, dated 2-2-1996 [reported in 1996 (82) E.L.T. 575 (Tribunal)] has held that the Modvat Credit is available in respect of Foundary Chemicals which are used in the manufacture of sand moulds and therefore, benefit has to be granted to the assessees, following the ratio of the Larger Bench.
The Learned Advocate submitted that this issue is decided against the party as has been so held in the case of Jhalani Tools (I) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise as reported in 1994 (70) E.L.T. 788 and therefore, the Tribunal can decide the case against them on this input.
The Learned Advocate submitted that the lower authorities have not granted the benefit in respect of these items. It is his submission that these items are required for rolling the ingot into various sizes and therefore, they have to be required to be considered as inputs.
In this case the lower authorities have denied all the benefit on the ground that they are used in the pit side where moulds are kept and the liquid metal passes through it to the moulds. Therefore, he submitted that the benefit cannot be denied in respect of this item.
The Learned Advocate submitted that the lower authorities have granted benefit in this case and no order is required.
The Learned Advocate submitted that the lower authorities have granted the benefit in respect of these items.
6. The learned DR submitted that taking into consideration the various judgments on this issue the benefit cannot be granted to the following inputs :- 7. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and have perused the judgments. On a careful consideration of these judgments it is clear that the various judgments have granted benefit to the assessees in respect of following inputs :- Ramming mass covered by the judgment of larger bench rendered in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. A.B. Tools Ltd. Foundary Chemicals are covered in favour of the assessee as per the larger bench's judgment rendered in the case of Ram Krishna Industries (supra).
Therefore, we hold that these two items are entitled for the benefit of the inputs in terms of the judgment.
8. The Learned Advocate has conceded that the benefit is not available to Refractory Bricks/Mortar in terms of the judgment rendered in the case of Collector of Central Excise, v. Raipur Steels and as held in the following judgments :Mukund Iron and Steel Works Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1990 (45) E.L.T. 84]Sathya Steel Strips Pvt.Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1988 (38) E.L.T. 485]Escorts Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, [1993 (68) E.L.T. 682] 9. Following all the ratio, benefit of the Modvat Credit is denied in respect of Refractory Bricks /Mortar The Learned Advocate concedes that the judgment in Jhalani Tools (I) Ltd. is against the assessees and therefore, following the ratio the benefit of Modvat Credit in respect of this item is denied and to the lower authorities order is upheld and (sic) take the Iron Rolls admittedly these items are used only for the purpose of rolling steel and they are (sic) as an input. Therefore we have to be considered it as machinery items and not as an input used in or in relation in the manufacture of final product and therefore, the denial of benefit by the lower authorities is required to be upheld. We uphold the reasoning given by the lower authorities as they are not used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products and they are equipments, and therefore, we uphold the lower authorities order.
The lower authorities have already granted the benefit to these items and has been held to be consumables in nature and therefore, no order is required to be passed in respect of these items.
10. On a final consideration, we hold that the benefit has to be granted in these appeals in respect of the inputs Ramming Mass, Foundary Chemicals only and the rejection of benefit in respect of other items like Refractory Bricks, Mortar, Grinding Wheels including Graphite fire powder, Iron Balls Rolls, Welding Sets, B.P. Sets are required to be upheld.