Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2016 (11) TMI 509 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
1. Denial of Cenvat credit on transmission assembly.
2. Classification of transmission assembly under the Central Excise Tariff Act.
3. Admissibility of credit for capital goods.
4. Impact of wrong classification by the supplier on credit availability.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing Cement and Clinker, faced a show cause notice proposing to deny Cenvat credit of &8377; 3,17,284/- for Pipes and Transmission Assembly during January to December 2007. While credit on Pipes was allowed, credit of &8377; 3,13,120/- for transmission assembly was denied due to its classification under Chapter 87, not specified for capital goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision, leading to the present appeal.

The appellant argued that the Transmission Assembly, used in mines connected to Cement manufacturing, qualifies as a capital good under Heading 84.83. Despite the supplier's classification under Chapter 87, the duty payment on the goods and their alignment with capital goods definition should allow credit. Citing Tribunal decisions, the appellant contended that wrong supplier classification should not hinder credit availability.

The judicial member analyzed the submissions and the impugned order, determining that the Transmission Assembly used in heavy machinery falls under Chapter 84.29, making it eligible for Cenvat credit. Acknowledging its use in mines for material transmission, the member emphasized that wrong supplier classification should not bar credit rightfully available to the assessee. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates