9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 894 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of CENVAT Credit - Rejection of PSC Sleepers claiming the same as input meant to be used in or in relation to the manufacture of their finished goods - Held that - On going through the impugned order, I find that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the Order-in-Original, has held that a little portion of the said PSC sleepers used in the manufacture of Pig Iron and S.G. Inserts, cannot make it eligible to call as input and eligible to Cenvat credit. I do not find any merit in the said observation inasmuch as the definition of input and other conditions laid down under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, makes it abundantly clear that to be eligible to cenvat credit, the input must be used in or in relation to the manufacture of finished goods. Once the inputs has been used in or in relation to the manufacture of finished products, the Appelalnts are eligible to the credit. There is no allegation in the show cause notice nor any finding in the impugned order that the wires and inserts retrieved/extracted out of breaking of the rejected PSC Sleepers, had not been used in or in relation to the manufacture of Pig Iron and S.G. Inserts and the same were cleared without payment of duty. In these premises, therefore, I do not find any merit in the impugned order - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
- Admissibility of cenvat credit on rejected PSC Sleepers - Interpretation of the definition of "input" under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 Admissibility of Cenvat Credit on Rejected PSC Sleepers: The case involved an appeal against an order confirming the denial of cenvat credit on rejected PSC Sleepers by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The Appellants, engaged in the manufacture of Pig Iron and S.G. Inserts, had availed cenvat credit on the rejected PSC Sleepers, claiming the wire and inserts extracted from them were used in the manufacture of their finished goods. The Commissioner upheld the denial, stating that a little portion of the PSC sleepers used in the manufacturing process did not qualify as eligible for cenvat credit. However, the Appellant argued that the usable portion of the PSC Sleepers, i.e., the wire and inserts, satisfied the condition of being used in or in relation to the manufacture of finished goods as per the definition of "input" under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Interpretation of the Definition of "Input" under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004: The Member (Judicial) analyzed the definition of "input" and the conditions stipulated under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It was emphasized that for cenvat credit eligibility, the input must be used in or in relation to the manufacture of finished goods. The Member found no merit in the Commissioner's observation that a small portion of the PSC sleepers used in the manufacturing process would disqualify the entire claim for cenvat credit. It was noted that there was no evidence or finding indicating that the wires and inserts extracted from the rejected PSC Sleepers were not used in or in relation to the manufacture of Pig Iron and S.G. Inserts. As a result, the impugned order denying cenvat credit was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law. In conclusion, the judgment clarified the interpretation of the term "input" under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, emphasizing the requirement of the input being used in or in relation to the manufacture of finished goods to qualify for cenvat credit. The decision highlighted the necessity of establishing the direct link between the input and the manufacturing process to determine admissibility, ultimately ruling in favor of the Appellants based on the specific circumstances of the case.
|
