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 - 2019 (1) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (1) TMI 367 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
Dispute over Cenvat Credit on various iron and steel items used for fabrication of machinery.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the Cenvat Credit on various iron and steel items used for fabrication of machinery. The appellant, a manufacturer of cement and clinker, was issued a show cause notice for taking Cenvat Credit on items not falling under the definition of capital goods. The notice invoked the extended period of limitation due to alleged suppression by the appellant. The matter was adjudicated, resulting in a reduced confirmed amount of credit, with the appellant contesting the decision. The appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) partially allowed the appeal, permitting further credit on specific items and retaining disallowance at a reduced amount. The appellant, unsatisfied with the decision, appealed before the Tribunal.

The appellant argued for the allowance of credit on the items used for fabrication of machinery falling under specific chapters. The Tribunal considered the rival contentions and referred to the ruling of the Larger Bench in Vandana Global Ltd. v/s CCE 2010, which was later reversed by the Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court. The Tribunal also cited decisions from the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and the Madras High Court, emphasizing the interpretation of Section 37 of the Central Excise Act and the treatment of items like angles, joists, beams, and bars used in fabrication of structures in the plant as inputs for production of excisable goods. The Tribunal noted the appellant’s entitlement to Cenvat Credit for supporting structures and structural items required for fabrication of plant and machinery, as upheld in previous judgments.

Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding the disputed Cenvat Credit of &8377;2,09,573/- as allowable to the appellant. The penalty was set aside, and the appellant was granted consequential benefits as per the order dictated and pronounced in the open court.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates