- (1.) We have perused the following substantial questions of law as framed by this Court in its order dated 18th August, 2005: "(1) Whether the Respondent/Assessee is entitled to claim Modvat/CENVAT when Capital goods is not owned/purchased nor taken on lease or hire purchase agreement (2) Whether the view taken by the Tribunal is correct in law in view of the decision reported in 2001 (138) ELT 889 Trb. Mumbai -
(2.) The factual position is that the AssesseeRespondent is engaged in manufacture of plastic articles/components and parts by using injection moulding machines. In the present matter the moulds, used to manufacture, in this case cabinets for television sets the finished product, were supplied to the Assessee by the Original Equipment Manufacturers. The dispute relates to the years 199798, 199899.
(3.) A show cause notice came to be issued on 27th October, 1999 alleging that the assessee has availed and utilized inadmissible Modvat Credit on the moulds as capital goods to the tune of Rs.35,49,659/ in contravention of Rules 57Q, 57R(3) and 57(T) of Central Excise Rule, 1944. The show cause notice has been issued for the reason that the Assessee is neither owner of the capital goods nor has it hired the same on lease, hirepurchase or loan agreement from the financer.;