2013 (7) TMI 789 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat Credit on various steel items like MS Angles, Channels, Joists, Sheets, Coils, Plates etc - Respondent are manufacturers of sugar and molasses chargeable to Central Excise duty - Items being neither inputs nor covered by the definition of capital goods, are not eligible for Cenvat credit Held that - In terms of definition of input as given in Rule 2 (k), the goods used for fabrication of capital goods for use in the factory are eligible for Cenvat credit Also, in terms of judgment of Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Union of India vs. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. reported in 2006 (5) TMI 44 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN , appeal against which has been dismissed by the Apex Court, the steel items used for repair and maintenance of the plant and machinery would be eligible for Cenvat credit Decided against the Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Eligibility of Cenvat credit for steel items used in sugar and molasses manufacturing process

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the eligibility of Cenvat credit for steel items utilized in the manufacturing process of sugar and molasses. The respondent, being manufacturers of sugar and molasses chargeable to Central Excise duty, had claimed Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 3,16,462/- for various steel items like MS Angles, Channels, Joists, Sheets, Coils, Plates, etc., used during the period from July 2007 to September 2007. The department contended that these steel items were neither inputs nor covered by the definition of capital goods, thus not eligible for Cenvat credit. The Deputy Commissioner, through an order-in-original, upheld the department's view and imposed a penalty on the respondent. However, on appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), the order-in-appeal set aside the Deputy Commissioner's decision, allowing the appeal and holding that the steel items had been used for repair and maintenance of machinery or for fabrication of new machinery components for the sugar mill.

Upon further appeal by the Revenue, the matter was brought before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the steel items in question were used for repair and maintenance of existing machinery or for the fabrication of new machinery components, as detailed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner had highlighted specific uses of the steel items, such as rollers for pressing bagasse, Injection Header pipe line at Boiler house, Cryztallizer, Juice Tray and Juice Tank, Juice Sulphiter and Syrup Sulphiter, body of different parts of capital goods, and ducting of the boiler. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner's findings were based on evidence submitted by the respondent, which had not been challenged by the department.

Furthermore, the Tribunal referenced legal precedents, including judgments from the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court and the Hon'ble Chhattisgarh High Court, supporting the eligibility of Cenvat credit for steel items used in repair and maintenance of plant machinery. The Tribunal concluded that based on the evidence presented and the legal principles cited, the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order was correct, and there was no infirmity in it. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the Cross Objection filed by the department was also disposed of accordingly.

In summary, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, affirming the eligibility of Cenvat credit for the steel items used by the respondent in the repair and maintenance of machinery or fabrication of new machinery components for the sugar mill, based on the evidence provided and relevant legal precedents.