9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 400X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Amit Agarwa, C.A. - for the Respondent ORDER The appeal by the Revenue is against order dated 26/6/13of Commissioner (appeals), Raipur, The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Ferro Alloys liable to Central Excise duty. They were availing Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods in terms of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Proceedings were initiated against the respondent for denial of Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ground that no reasons were discussed for the conclusion. The matter was remanded back to the Tribunal for a fresh, reasoned and speaking order. 2. The learned AR elaborating on the grounds of appeal submitted that the supporting structures are clearly excluded from the purview of definition of inputs under Rule 2 (k) (iii) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 applicable to the relevant time. Reliance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods and their further usage in the respondent's factory which has been specifically examined by the Commissioner (Appeals). He has recorded a categorical finding that they are not supporting structures of plant and machinery or for laying foundation and, hence, the findings of the Adjudicating Authority is factually not correct. He placed reliance on various invoices issued by the supplier of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order and on examination of appeal papers, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order on merits. 5. The learned Counsel for the respondent also submitted that the demand is hit by time bar. 6. It is an admitted fact that during the period of dispute there has been large number of litigation regarding eligibility or otherwise of similar set of items for various ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
