Judgment:
1. The issue for decision in this appeal is whether the cylinders which comprised the fire extinguishers manufactured by the appellant would be entitled to Modvat credit or not. In the case of the fire extinguisher under consideration, it was only carbon dioxide under pressure which was contained in the cylinder. The Assistant Collector whose order has been confirmed by the Collector (Appeals) has held that these cylinders would fall within the ambit of Explanation (iv) to Rule 57A, which provided that credit would not be available on cylinders for packing gases.
3. The reliance by the representative of the appellant on the clarification issued by the Board in its letter No. 267/38/88 & 88/26488 is well founded. In that clarification, the Board has explained how the cylinders in the present type of goods are a part of fire extinguishers and their value included in the assessable value of fire extinguishers. It is further explained that after the extinguishers are used the cylinders are destroyed or kept by the buyers. It is thus distinguishable from the type of cylinders in which gases of various types are packed and transported. In the latter case the cylinders are almost invariably returned to the manufacturer and hence their value is not included in the assessable value. In the light of the clear reasoning given in the circular, it would be evident that the cylinders which form part of fire extinguisher would not be hit by the Explanation to Rule 57A and credit would have been available on these cylinders. In these circumstances, we are unable to accept the contentions of the Deptl. representative that the clarification should only take effect from the date from which it was issued. In any event, the Board cannot restrict or enlarge by the scope of the law by a clarification.