2016 (6) TMI 1147 - AT - Central Excise

Availability of CENVAT Credit of duty paid on various iron and steel articles which accordingly to the Revenue has been raised as supporting structural and as such appellant entitled to the benefit of credit in terms of the law declared by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Vandana Global Ltd.Vs. CCE Raipur 2010 (4) TMI 133 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI (LB) - Held that - Inasmuch as the decision relate to the factual position, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to Commissioner for fresh decision - The factual aspect of use of these items would be determined by him and the issue would be decided accordingly. However, we may take note of the recent decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mundra Ports & Special Economic Zone Ltd. Vs. CCE & Cus. 2015 (5) TMI 663 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT wherein the Larger Bench decision of M/s. Vandana Global was considered and was not agreed upon. While deciding the issue, the Adjudicating Authority would also take at all the said decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court or any other decision which the appellant may choose to rely upon. Miscellaneous application for producing additional ground is also disposed off with the direction to the Adjudicating Authority to examine all the evidences (in the shape of certificates or otherwise), in the de-novo proceedings. Miscellaneous application for extension of stay is also disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Availability of CENVAT Credit on iron and steel articles for fabrication of capital goods.

The judgment addresses the issue of the availability of CENVAT Credit on duty paid for iron and steel articles used for fabrication of capital goods. The Revenue contends that the items were used as supporting structural, entitling the appellant to credit based on the law declared by the Larger Bench in a specific case. However, the appellant argues that the items were used for fabrication of capital goods, making them eligible for credit even under the Larger Bench decision.

The Tribunal decides to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Commissioner for a fresh decision due to the factual nature of the issue. The Commissioner is tasked with determining the factual aspect of the use of the items and making a decision accordingly. Additionally, the Tribunal highlights a recent decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court which did not agree with the Larger Bench decision, indicating that the Adjudicating Authority should consider this and any other decisions the appellant may present.

The appeal is disposed of with the above directions, and a miscellaneous application for producing additional grounds is also disposed of with instructions for the Adjudicating Authority to examine all evidence in the de-novo proceedings. Another miscellaneous application for an extension of stay is also disposed of, while the plea of limitation is kept on record for future reference. The judgment emphasizes a thorough examination of all evidence and relevant decisions in the adjudication process.