2016 (2) TMI 994 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - whether the appellant manufacturer of sugar and molasses have rightly availed Cenvat credit of ₹ 18,36,911/- during the period August, 2006 to December, 2006 on Plates/Coils/Shape and Section/M.S. Angles/M.S. Round and Flat/M.S. Channels falling under chapter 72 and 73 of the CETA, 1985 by treating these goods as inputs? - Held that - I hold that the appellant is entitled to Cenvat credit on the items of iron and steel in question if the same have been used for fabrication of capital goods, for repair and maintenance of capital goods, for fabrication of staging structures and supporting structures etc. as no excisable products can be manufactured without the same. Further, the amended definition of inputs under the Cenvat Credit Rules provides for availability of Cenvat dredit to a manufacturer on all items utilised by the manufacturer in the factory of production. Accordingly, I allow this appeal by way of remand with a direction to the Adjudicating Authority to verify the claim of the appellant in the light of the directions and findings recorded hereinabove after verification of the utilisation of the items of iron and steel - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appellant manufacturer rightly availed Cenvat credit on iron and steel items used in fabrication of capital goods and repair thereof.

Analysis:
The issue in this appeal revolved around the appellant manufacturer's entitlement to Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 18,36,911/- during August 2006 to December 2006 on various iron and steel items falling under chapter 72 and 73 of the CETA, 1985. The Revenue issued a show cause notice (SCN) contending that the items were used in construction of civil structures, not qualifying as inputs under Rule 2(k) of CCR, 2004. The SCN proposed disallowance and recovery of the Cenvat credit along with interest and penalty. The appellant argued that the items were used in making machinery like Boiler, Vacuum Pan, shades for machinery, sugarcane carrier chain, staging structures, and for repair and maintenance purposes. They highlighted the necessity of these items for the efficient working of the sugar factory, emphasizing the importance of proper height and angle for machinery operation and maintenance.

The Order-in-Original confirmed the demand raised in the SCN, leading to the appellant's appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who dismissed it stating that the items appeared to be used in construction of godowns, sheds, and for plant maintenance. The appellant then approached the Tribunal, citing the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in India Cements Ltd. case, which allowed Cenvat credit on iron and steel items used in fabrication of capital goods and repair. They also referred to a previous Tribunal order in their favor on a similar issue. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments, held that the appellant is entitled to Cenvat credit if the iron and steel items were used for fabrication of capital goods, repair and maintenance of capital goods, and for staging structures, crucial for manufacturing excisable products. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of these items in the manufacturing process and directed the Adjudicating Authority to verify the appellant's claim regarding the utilization of the iron and steel items before allowing the credit. The appeal was allowed by way of remand for further verification.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on the interpretation of Cenvat credit rules and the necessity of iron and steel items in the manufacturing process of excisable products. The case highlighted the importance of proper verification of utilization to determine the eligibility for Cenvat credit, emphasizing the manufacturer's entitlement to credit if the items were used for specific purposes outlined in the judgment.