9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it cannot be alleged that the appellant has suppressed the fact or any ingredient as provided under proviso to Section 11Ac is applicable in the fact and circumstances of the case. The case of N.R. Agarwal Industries [2014 (5) TMI 603 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held that longer period of limitation is not invokable in the case of Cenvat Credit availed in respect of goods namely Angles, Channels, Tubes Rails etc. In all other judgments cited by the Ld. Counsel, this Tribunal has taken consistent view that since admissibility of Cenvat credit in respect of structural steel items is an issue of interpretation of Cenvat Rules, therefore extended period of limitation is not invokable. - Decided in favour of assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit on the basis of Larger Bench decision in the case ofVandana Global Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Raiput [2010 (253) E.L.T. 440 (Tri-LB)]. She submits that ratio of the Vandana Global Ltd. case is not applicable in the present case for the reason that the appellant has taken credit on the steel material as input which has been directly used in the fabrication of platform which is used for erection of reactors within the factory of the appellant. Since the appellant has discharged excise duty on the platform treating it as excisable goods, the Cenvat credit in respect of such steel material is admissible. Hence Vandana Global Ltd. judgment not relevant in the present case. She further submits that the show cause notice has invoked exte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit was disputed by the Revenue on the basis of judgment in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. of Larger Bench of this Tribunal. Prior to reference of this Vandana Global Ltd case to the Larger Bench of this Tribunal, in various judgments the Tribunal allowed the credit of structural steel item and thereafter one of the Division Bench of this Tribunal had contrary view and matter was referred to the Larger Bench. Under this position of law on the issue of Cenvat Credit in respect of structural steel items assessee had bonafide belief and rather bound by the judgment of this Tribunal wherein Cenvat Credit was allowed therefore it cannot be alleged that the appellant has suppressed the fact or any ingredient as provided under proviso to Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
