2015 (9) TMI 1485 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - inputs - MS angle, channel, joist, HR coil, chequered plates and flat, etc - whether the denial of CENVAT credit on the ground that the disputed goods are neither inputs, nor capital goods, justified? - Held that - The issue, regarding eligibility of CENVAT credit on the disputed goods, has already been settled by this Tribunal in various cases, case of CCE&CE Vs. APP Mills Ltd 2013 (7) TMI 494 - CESTAT BANGALORE , this Tribunal has held that MS angles plates and rounds used for fabricating structural support to plant and machinery used for manufacturing of excisable goods are integral part of machinery and hence covered under the definition of capital goods. Further, the Tribunal in the case of Shriram Hi-tech Steel & Power Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur 2014 (10) TMI 57 - CESTAT NEW DELHI has held that that MS rounds, MS sheets and CR coils used for making of various machines shall be eligible for CENVAT benefit. In the case of CCE, Raipur Vs. Hi-Tech Power & Steel Ltd. 2015 (9) TMI 1374 - CESTAT NEW DELHI the Tribunal has held that the steel items used in fabrication of coal ground hopper, iron ore ground hopper, coal crusher house, conveyer system, stock house, after burning chamber, kiln coller transformer house, etc. are eligible for CENVAT benefit under the head input definition in Rule 2(k) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The disputed goods during the material point of time were not covered under the exclusion clause contained in the definition of input. Since the disputed goods are used for erection/fabrication of capital goods only in the plant, the same have the nexus with the manufacture of final product in the factory of the respondent. The definition of input is broad enough to take within its ambit, the goods which are used for or in relation to manufacture of final product either directly or indirectly - credit allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility of CENVAT credit on disputed goods.

Analysis:
The case involves an appeal by the Revenue against an order passed by the C.C.E (Appeals), Raipur, regarding the eligibility of CENVAT credit on certain goods used in the manufacture of sponge iron. The respondent availed CENVAT credit on items like MS angle, channel, joist, HR coil, chequered plates, and flat, considering them as inputs. The Central Excise Department denied the credit, leading to Show Cause Notices and an adjudication order disallowing the credit and imposing penalties. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, stating that the goods in question conform to the definition of input and capital goods under the CENVAT scheme.

Upon hearing both parties, the Tribunal found that the disputed goods, used for erection and installation of various machinery and equipment essential for manufacturing activities, qualify as input/capital goods for CENVAT credit. The Tribunal cited precedents where items like MS angles, plates, rounds, sheets, and coils used in fabricating structural support or machinery were considered integral parts eligible for CENVAT benefit. The Tribunal emphasized that the disputed goods were not excluded from the definition of input and had a nexus with the manufacture of the final product, meeting the broad criteria set by the CENVAT rules.

Considering the above analysis, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The judgment affirms that the disputed goods, integral to the manufacturing process, are eligible for CENVAT credit under the defined rules, as they are used directly or indirectly in the production of the final product within the factory.