CCE Vs. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal of the Revenue, the short question is whether capital goods credit was admissible to "MS Tanks" (Heading No. 73.09 of the CETA Schedule) during October, 1996. According to the appellant, goods falling under Heading No. 73.09 were brought within the scope of 'Capital goods' for Modvat purpose only with effect from 1.3.2001 (vide Notification No. 6/2001 -CE(NT) dt. 1.3.2001 and, therefore, capital goods credit was not available to such goods prior to 1.3.2001. Ld DR has reiterated this ground of the appeal. According to ld. Counsel for the respondents, MS Tank, which was admittedly, a part of the manufacturing plant was an eligible capital goods in terms of Clause (a) of Explanation 1 to Rule 57Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 during the period of dispute. He has further submitted that, as held by the Tribunal's Larger Bench in Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore v. Surya Roshni Ltd. . The question whether any goods could be held eligible for capital goods credit under Rule 57Q should be decided in terms of the express provisions of the Rule prevailing during the relevant period. Benefit of Clause (a) of Explanation 1 to Rule 57Q(1) cannot be denied to the assessee on the ground that the capital goods in question were specifically mentioned in the list of modvatable capital goods on a later date. I am inclined to agree with this argument of Ld. Counsel. Admittedly, during the period of dispute, Clause (a) of Explanation 1 to Rule 57Q stood as under: