2018 (12) TMI 233 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - inputs - structural steel items used for fabricating and/or laying foundation to support the capital goods - Held that - Similar case has been decided by this Bench in the case of Neo Metaliks Ltd. Vs. CCE, Bolpur 2018 (8) TMI 399 - CESTAT KOLKATA , where it was held that Board Circular vide Circular F.No.B-4/7/2000-TRU, dated 03.04.2000 laying down that credit can be taken as and when capital goods are received in the factory but not yet installed. The structurals such as M.S. Channel and Joints etc. are eligible for CENVAT Credit as capital goods under Rule 2 (K) ibid - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues involved: Availment of Cenvat Credit on structural steel items used for fabricating and/or laying foundation to support capital goods within the relevant period.

The judgment pertains to an appeal filed against an order confirming a demand and imposing a penalty on the appellant under the Customs Act. The appellant, a manufacturer of Sponge Iron, availed Cenvat Credit on structural steel items for installing capital goods at their manufacturing facility. The issue revolves around the interpretation of Cenvat Credit Rule 2(k) before a specific amendment. The appellant argued for allowing the appeal based on precedents like Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. The Revenue, however, relied on a decision in Vandana Global Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur. The Tribunal cited a similar case, Neo Metaliks Ltd. vs. CCE, Bolpur, where it was held that steel items used for fabricating structures supporting machinery qualify as capital goods for Cenvat Credit. This decision was based on the user test, emphasizing the necessity and functionality of the steel items in the manufacturing process. The judgment referenced the Supreme Court's stance on the definition of capital goods and the user test's application. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, aligning with previous rulings and granting consequential benefits to the appellant.

In conclusion, the judgment delves into the interpretation of Cenvat Credit rules concerning the eligibility of structural steel items as capital goods. It highlights the importance of the user test in determining whether certain items qualify for Cenvat Credit. By referencing past judgments and legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the steel items in question were integral to the manufacturing process and thus eligible for Cenvat Credit. The decision underscores the significance of functionality and necessity in defining capital goods, emphasizing the practical role played by the structural steel items in supporting machinery and facilitating production.