2006 (8) TMI 51 - AT - Central Excise

Central Excise Capital goods credit on cement used in civil construction, not allowed Assessee not able to prove that coromastic brick were used for a specialized purpose of manufacture of their final product Ceramic fibre qualify for capital goods credit as parts/components/accessories of plant in terms of the definition of capital goods

Summary

Issues:
Availability of capital goods credit for Ceramic Fibre, Cement, and Coromastic Brick Lining for the period April to June '94.

Analysis:
The appeal considered whether the assessee was entitled to capital goods credit for the items used during the specified period. The authorities had previously denied credit on Ceramic Fibre, Cement, and Coromastic Brick Lining. The appellant argued that all items were used in the manufacturing plant and should qualify for capital goods credit. Reference was made to a previous decision allowing credit for cement used in plant construction. However, ambiguity existed regarding the use of cement for construction purposes. The tribunal noted that the appellants did not specify whether cement was used for civil construction or plant construction. Consequently, capital goods credit for cement was denied. Regarding Brick Lining, the tribunal observed that the bricks were likely used in civil construction without a specialized purpose related to the manufacturing process, leading to the denial of credit for this item. However, the tribunal found a valid case for capital goods credit on Ceramic Fibre, used for insulating the furnace and pipeline, as they were integral parts of the plant. Therefore, Ceramic Fibre qualified for capital goods credit as per the definition under Rule 57Q for the disputed period.

The judgment concluded by allowing the appeal only in part, specifically granting capital goods credit for Ceramic Fibre. The impugned order was modified accordingly.