9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard to the material which was used while filing a declaration and availing Cenvat credit. Without displacing this basic finding of fact, the Tribunal ought not to have, in our view, disturbed the order which was passed - matter remanded back - Decided in favour of Revenue. - Central Excise Appeal No. - 163 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 3-9-2014 - Hon'ble Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, CJ And Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,JJ. For the Appellant : B. K. S. Raghuvanshi For the Respondent : A. P. Mathur ORDER The appeal by the Revenue arises from an order of the CESTAT dated 22 January 2014. The following question of law has been formulated by the Revenue: Whether the CESTAT has erred in holding that extended period of limi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n staying structural material of chapter subheading 7308.90 claiming them as capital goods. The trade name of the structural itself suggests that they are construction/fabrication material. I find that the party in their defence submission has admitted that the material has been used for fabrication. I further observe that the issue of eligibility of Modvat credit on structural material has been squarely dealt with by the Hon'ble Tribunal in DSM Sugar Mills Vs. CCE Allahabad [2002 (147) ELT 570 (T)]. The Tribunal applied the ratio of Malvika Steel case, wherein it has been held that steel structure used in erecting and fabrication machinery is building material and not capital goods and thus denied the benefit of Modvat in respect of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee, in appeal, that the issue of the use of steel items as supporting structures had been decided against the assessee by a larger Bench of the Tribunal in Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur1. However, the Tribunal held that the extended period of limitation would not be applicable on the ground that there were decisions in favour of the assessee during the relevant period and the law was declared against it only subsequently by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal. The appeal of the assessee was allowed only on the ground that the extended period of limitation would not apply. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that both in the order of the Adjudicating Authority as well as the first Appellate Authority, it was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
