9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 498X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... left behind in the process, the respondents wanted to set up a sinter plant for conversion of iron ore fines to agglomerated iron ore which could be used in the blast furnace for the production of the final product (pig iron). For the purpose of setting up this plant, they imported machinery and other capital goods, which were received in their factory during the period from December 1996 to January 1997. They did not take initially CENVAT credit on the capital goods, as the relevant rule, which was then in force, did not permit them to do so, as the capital goods were yet to be installed in their factory. However, with the amendment of CENVAT Rules (substitution of Rules 57A to 57U of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 with Rules 57AA to 57AK ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llment of the requirement, under Rule 57AC(b), of having to put the capital goods to use in the manufacture of final product, and (b) that the demand of Rs. 34,58,876/- from the respondents for the year 2000-01 was time-barred. The learned Commissioner did not go into the question whether the capital goods were eligible for CENVAT credit. In holding that a part of the demand was time-barred, he held that there was no suppression of facts by the party. In the result, the following order was passed :- ORDER 1. I confirm the duty amount of Rs. 3458876/- (Rupees thirty four lakhs fifty eight thousand eight hundred and seventy six only) under Section 11A(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. The assessee should also pay interest under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ghtly pointed out by the learned SDR, it was the case of the Revenue that the capital goods which were intended to be used in the manufacture of agglomerated iron ore (chargeable to nil rate of duty), were not CENVATable. The adjudicating authority sidestepped this question and proceeded to examine the limitation issue insofar as the 50% of CENVAT credit taken in May 2000 was concerned. As regards the balance credit availed by the party on 1-4-2001, the authority held that the condition laid down under Section 57AC(2)(b) was not complied with and, therefore, the credit was not admissible. The learned Commissioner ought to have, at the outset, examined the basic issue as to whether the capital goods which were allegedly meant for exclusive u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
