2008 (9) TMI 68 - HC - Central Excise

Ropeway connecting factory with mines credit on inputs used in mines - includibility of mines under factory - original ground plan submitted by the petitioner and approved by the Excise Authorities consisted of the mines and the ropeway - order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Excise himself, which categorically held that the original approved plan included the mines also - respondents are directed to approve a ground plan of the petitioner including the factory, mine and rope way

Summary

Issues:
1. Approval of site plan by Central Excise Authorities including mines and ropeway.
2. Dispute over the approval of original site plan.
3. Rejection of original ground plan by Central Excise authorities.
4. Petitioner's request for approval of site plan including mines and ropeway.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a cement manufacturing company, obtained a lease for mining raw materials from vested forest land. The company sought clarification on availing modvat credit for inputs and capital goods used in the mines and ropeway. Supreme Court rulings clarified eligibility for modvat credit regardless of the location of goods used. However, potential amendments restricting relief to approved site plans raised concerns for the petitioner if the original plan's approval was altered.

2. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed that the original approved site plan included the mines within the factory premises. Despite this, the Central Excise authorities requested a fresh ground plan excluding the mines. The petitioner's objection was dismissed, leading to the approval of a revised ground plan solely for the factory. The petitioner challenged this decision through a writ petition.

3. The petitioner sought relief from the court to quash the decision rejecting the original ground plan and to direct the approval of the plant, mine, and ropeway as licensed premises under the Central Excise Act. The court analyzed the available evidence, including the Assistant Commissioner's order, which explicitly stated the inclusion of mines in the approved plan. The court concluded that the respondents could not disregard this evidence and insisted on a revised ground plan excluding the mines.

4. Consequently, the court quashed the decision rejecting the original ground plan and directed the approval of a comprehensive ground plan including the factory, mines, and ropeway. This approved plan would govern all future Central Excise matters for the petitioner, ensuring clarity and consistency in transactions. The court allowed the original petition in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the approved site plan for regulatory compliance.