2013 (7) TMI 747 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of capital goods - whether the welding electrodes, plates, channels and various other iron and steel items used for repair and maintenance of capital goods are eligible capital goods or not - Held that - Following decisions of HINDUSTAN ZINC LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA 2008 (7) TMI 55 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN , AMBUJA CEMENTS EASTERN LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., RAIPUR 2010 (4) TMI 429 - CHHAITISGARH HIGH COURT , COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BANGALORE-I Versus ALFRED HERBERT (INDIA) LTD. 2010 (4) TMI 424 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT and SREE RAYALASEEMA HI-STRENGTH HYPO LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CUS. & C. EX., TIRUPATI 2012 (11) TMI 255 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Whether welding electrodes, plates, channels, and other iron and steel items used for repair and maintenance of capital goods qualify as eligible capital goods.

Analysis:
The judgment by Ms. Archana Wadhwa addresses the issue of whether certain iron and steel items used for repair and maintenance of capital goods can be considered as eligible capital goods. The appellant and the respondent presented arguments based on various decisions of High Courts and Tribunals. The appellants relied on judgments from the Rajasthan High Court, Chhattisgarh High Court, and Karnataka High Court, while the Learned DR highlighted a decision from the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

The Tribunal, in a previous case involving M/s. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd., considered the arguments from both sides and referred to decisions from the Chhattisgarh High Court, Rajasthan High Court, and Karnataka High Court. The Tribunal also noted that the Rajasthan High Court decision in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. had been upheld by the Apex Court. Additionally, the Tribunal took into account the Andhra Pradesh High Court decision, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee based on the precedent set in the case of Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd.

In conclusion, Ms. Archana Wadhwa upheld the Tribunal's decision in the case of Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd., setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with consequential relief to the appellant. The judgment provides clarity on the eligibility of certain iron and steel items as capital goods for repair and maintenance purposes.