9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tyres get used in the process of handling raw materials which is an integral part of manufacturing process. Cenvat credit is allowed on goods which get consumed over a period of time like refractory lining or catalyst. The goods can be considered as inputs and Cenvat Credit is available on tyres of LPDT used by the appellant in mines. - In favour of assessee - E/Appeal No.1631 & 1632/2010-SM - FINAL ORDER NO.1465-1466/2012-SM(BR) - Dated:- 16-8-2012 - Mathew John, J. Appellant Rep by: Shri B.L. Narsimhan, Adv. Respondent Rep by: Shri Bharat Bhushan, DR Per: Mathew John: The appellants are manufacturers of Zinc and availing benefit of Cenvat Credit Scheme. The issue involved in these appeals is the cenvat credit t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly motor vehicles. Once LPDT is not held input, tyres used therein, cannot by stretch of any imagination be termed 'input for the purpose of cenvat credit. This is a used based fact finding which was not controverted by the appellant by producing evidence and therefore, do not require any interference from the appellate authority. The case laws cited by the appellant do not help them as the facts of the case laws are different that the present case as also observed by the adjudicating authority." 2. The Counsel for appellants submits the process of transporting ore is within the mines. The process is integrally connected with the process of manufacture. He argues that to classify any goods used in manufacturing process as 'input', there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . India Cement Ltd 2005 (182) ELT 398 (Tri. Bang) and Tribunal extended credit in respect of tyres, tubes and flaps for dumpers used in the mine. Therefore, he pleads that cenvat credit should be allowed to the present appellant also. 4. Opposing the prayer of the appellant, learned AR submits that LPDT does not qualify to be "capital goods" in as much as it falls under Chapter 87 of the Central Excise Tariff which is not mentioned in the definition at Rule 2(a). According to him, when the machinery is not eligible for cenvat credit, cenvat credit cannot be allowed on a part of such machinery. He specifically draws attention to explanation 2 of Rule 2(K) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which reads as under: "Explanation 2.- Input i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not include any equipment or appliance used in an office; or (2) for providing output service; (B) motor vehicle registered in the name of provider of output service for providing taxable service as specified in sub-clauses (f), (n), (o), (zr), (zzp), (zzt) and (zzw) of clause (105) of section 65 of the Finance Act;" 8. The above definition does not cover LDPT which falls under chapter 87 of the Central Excise Tariff used by the appellant who is a manufacturer of excisable goods. So it is fairly clear that LDPT cannot be treated as "capital goods". 9. The next issue is whether LDPT can be considered as an "input" within the definition at Rule 2 (k). This definition covers goods "used in or in relation to the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (iv) cylinders for packing gases." 11. However such express legal provision got omitted when cenvat credit was allowed for capital goods since 01-03-1994 and is absent in the present Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The present argument of Revenue relies mainly on common understanding of the expressions "inputs" and "capital goods" and historical evolution of the definitions for these expressions for allowing Cenvat credit. The Tribunal in the case of Aditya Cement Vs. CCE Jaipur-II-2009 (245) E.L.T. 266 (Tri.-Del) has held that goods which are accounted as capital assets cannot be considered as inputs. There is no reason to differ from this view. 12. So I accept the argument of Revenue that LDPT is neither covered by definition of "capital ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
