9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s have been specifically intimated by the appellant to the jurisdictional central excise officers nor the fabrication of various items of capital goods and their components and accessories was declared in the ER-I return. - Cenvat credit in respect of these items would be admissible only if there is conclusive evidence that these items had been used for fabrication of capital goods and their components, parts and accessories. But prima facie, such evidence in this case is lacking. Therefore, we are of the prima facie view that the items were not eligible for cenvat credit either as inputs or as capital goods. - this is not case for total waiver - stay granted partly. - E/2516 of 2011 - Stay Order No. 1344/2012 - Ex (BR) - Dated:- 16-8-2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w cause notice was confirmed along with the interest and besides this, penalty of equal amount was imposed on the appellant under Rule 15 (2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In course, of proceedings before the Commissioner, the appellant pleaded that disputed items had been used for making components, spares and accessories of various items of capital goods like components of Weigh Bridge, Steam Exhaust Duct, Boiler Bunker for stocking feeding coal, FD Fan Duct, Air Pre Heater, Raw materials Handling Conveyor, Electro Static Precipitator, Chimney, Crusher House for Coal, Dust Extraction System, Turbine House, Air Cooled Condensing System, Fly ash Silo and its conveyor, Boiler House, Bucket Elevator System, Air Receiver Tank, De- minera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gent views of the High Court extended period of five years is not invokable and that the ratio of these judgments of the Apex Court is squarely applicable to the facts of this case and hence, the entire cenvat credit demand is time barred. He, therefore, pleaded that the appellant have a strong prima facie case and hence, the requirement of pre-deposit of cenvat credit demand, interest and penalty may be waived for hearing of the appeal and recovery thereof may be stayed till the disposal of the appeal. 3. Shri Devendra Singh, learned Jt. CDR, opposed the stay application and reiterating the finding s of the Commissioner in the impugned order pleaded that the appellant do not have prima facie case in their favour. He pleaded that thoug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ital goods nor components or accessories have been specifically intimated by the appellant to the jurisdictional central excise officers nor the fabri cation of various items of capital goods and their components and accessories was declared in the ER - I return. Cenvat credit in respect of these items would be admissible only if there is conclusive evidence that these items had been used for fabrication o f capital goods and their components, parts and accessories. But prima facie, such evidence in this case is lacking. Therefore, we are of the prima facie view that the items were not eligible for cenvat credit either as inputs or as capital goods. 5. As regards the question of limitation, we find that there is no evidence that the use ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
