9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2/- being the CENVAT credit denied on various services claimed to be 'input services' and found to have been used for setting up of the appellant's cement factory during the period from September 2008 to July 2009. On a perusal of the records, we find that the appellant took CENVAT credit on Aluminium Scrap, TMT Bars, MS Plates, Beams, Channels, Angles and Cement classifying these items as capital goods under Rule 2(a) (A) of the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 and used these items for fabricating pre-heater, raw mill house, cement/clinker storage tanks/silos, raw mill silos etc. during the above period. Before the adjudicating authority, the appellant alternatively claimed CENVAT credit in terms of Rule 2(k) of the CCR 2004 on the above materials ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k also should be capital goods for purposes of CENVAT credit. The expression components/spares/accessories figuring under clause (iii) of the definition of Capital Goods is relatable only to the capital goods covered by clause (i) & (ii) of the definition. (iii) The adjudicating authority found no nexus of the aforesaid materials with the process of manufacture of cement. It found that the aforesaid materials were used for laying foundations and building structural support. Prima facie, the challenge to these findings is not strong enough to support the claim of the appellant for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery. (iv) The alternative plea of the appellant that the aforesaid materials viz. Aluminium Scrap, Steel items, Cement etc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the definition. While denying CENVAT credit on some of the input services on the above technical ground, the learned Commissioner did not dispute the tax-paid nature of the services and the nexus of the services with the business of manufacture of cement. For these reasons, we find prima facie case for the appellant against the CENVAT credit denied on the input services. 3. The entire demand is within the normal period and there is no serious plea of financial hardships. 4. In the result, we direct the appellant to pre-deposit an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) towards denial of CENVAT credit of over Rs. 2 crores on the structural items. They shall pre-deposit the said amount within 8 weeks (this much time specifically pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
