9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1500 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - inputs - MS angles, MS plates, channels, aluminium coils, asbestos, etc., used for making structures for support of capital goods - Held that - The issue is no longer res integra and has been laid to rest by the jurisdictional Hon ble High Court of Madras in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. Vs. CESTAT, Chennai 2017 (7) TMI 524 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , where it was held that the credit availed on such MS channels, plates, etc., used as structural items, is very much eligible. The Ld. AR has argued that while the decision has covered only MS angles, plates, channels, etc., however, in the present appeals, there is also a dispute concerning admissibility of Cenvat Credit on asbestos - Going by the ratio laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the Thiru Arooran Sugars judgment, asbestos would also be required as a structural, along with the MS angles, plates, etc. - credit allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Admissibility of Cenvat Credit on MS angles, MS plates, channels, aluminium coils, asbestos, etc., used for making structures for support of capital goods. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai addressed the common issue of the admissibility of Cenvat Credit on various materials used for making structures to support capital goods. The period of dispute in all appeals was before 07.07.2009. The Tribunal noted that the issue had been previously settled by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. vs. CESTAT, Chennai, where it was held that MS structurals supporting plant and machinery are integral parts of capital goods, making them eligible for Cenvat credit under Rule 2(a)(A) and 2(k) of the 2004 Rules. The Tribunal referred to its own previous decisions, such as in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. and Commissioner of GST & Central Excise vs. Shree Ambika Sugars Ltd., where it was held that the credit availed on MS channels, plates, etc., used as structural items, is eligible for Cenvat credit. The Tribunal further clarified that based on the High Court's judgment, asbestos should also be considered a structural item along with MS materials, making the credit availed on asbestos admissible. Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in all cases, setting aside the impugned orders and allowing the appeals with any consequential benefits as per the law. The decision was pronounced in open court by the members of the Tribunal.
|
