Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2016 (2) TMI 208 - AT - Central Excise


Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to Cenvat credit on rails embedded in the ground and used as fixed assets.
2. Admissibility of Cenvat credit on structural items used in manufacturing components of capital goods.
3. Application of precedents and circulars regarding Cenvat credit on structural items.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Entitlement to Cenvat Credit on Rails Embedded in the Ground:
The primary issue was whether the respondent could take Cenvat credit on rails embedded in the ground, used for EOT cranes, cooling beds, and chattals. The appellant argued that since these rails are fixed to the earth and serve as structures for EOT cranes, they should not qualify for Cenvat credit. The appellant relied on the precedent set in Nelvetha Cast Steels (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Madhurai, which held that supports do not automatically become part of the crane.

2. Admissibility of Cenvat Credit on Structural Items Used in Manufacturing Components of Capital Goods:
The Commissioner (A) examined the issue based on a Chartered Engineer's certificate, which confirmed that the rails were essential components of the EOT cranes, cooling beds, and chattals. The Commissioner observed that:
- EOT Cranes: Rails are used for the overhead track for EOT cranes, essential for their operation. Without these rails, the cranes cannot function, making them integral to the manufacturing process.
- Cooling Beds: Rails form the primary structure of cooling beds, essential for cooling finished products in the rolling mill.
- Chattals: Rails are used in chattals, which are crucial for quality checks and dispatch of finished products.

The Commissioner concluded that these rails are integral components of the manufacturing process and not merely supporting structures.

3. Application of Precedents and Circulars Regarding Cenvat Credit on Structural Items:
The Adjudicating Authority had disallowed the Cenvat credit based on the judgment in M/s. Vandana Global Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur, and Board's Circular No. 267/11/2010-CX, which stated that goods like cement and steel used for laying foundations or supporting structures are not eligible for Cenvat credit. However, the Commissioner (A) found that the rails were used to manufacture components of capital goods, not for construction or support purposes. The Commissioner cited the following precedents and circulars to support this view:
- Madras Cements Ltd. v. CCE: The Supreme Court held that capital goods used in the manufacturing process are eligible for Cenvat credit.
- Union of India v. ACC Ltd.: The High Court allowed credit on steel plates and channels used in manufacturing components of capital goods.
- CBEC Circular No. 267/11/2010-CX: Clarified that credit is available on inputs used in manufacturing capital goods, except for items used in construction or support structures.

The Commissioner concluded that the rails used by the appellant were components of capital goods and thus eligible for Cenvat credit under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Final Judgment:
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (A)'s order, stating that the appellant had provided sufficient evidence, including a Chartered Engineer's certificate, to show that the rails were used as components of capital goods. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, finding no infirmity in the Commissioner's decision. The judgment emphasized that the structural items in question were integral to the manufacturing process and not merely supporting structures, thus qualifying for Cenvat credit.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates