9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of Rule 57A. - I consider that the claim put forward by appellants under the category of capital goods in their reply to show-cause notice yields merit. Denial of credit is unjustified - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No.E/20020/2015 - FINAL ORDER No.A/30885/2016 - Dated:- 27-9-2016 - Ms. Sulekha Beevi, C.S., Member (Judicial) Shri Karan Talwar, Advocate for the appellant. Shri P.S. Reddy, Asst. Commissioner(AR) for the respondent. [Order per: Sulekha Beevi, C.S.] The appellants are manufacturers of iron and steel products and are also availing facility of CENVAT credit on inputs and capital goods. On verification of records, it was noticed by the Department that during the period from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... X dt. 02/04/2012 to canvass the proposition that the Department having clarified that credit is admissible on structural components of boiler has to concede the fact that rails and railway tracks being structural components / accessories / parts of crane used in the factory without which the crane cannot be functioned, the credit cannot be disallowed. 3. On behalf of the Department the learned AR Shri Nagraj Naik strongly defended the findings in the impugned order. He submitted that decisions quoted by the appellant pertain to the period prior to 01/04/2007 and therefore are not applicable. The learned counsel submitted that the appellants have claimed credit under the category of inputs and therefore not eligible under the category of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee in terms of Rule 57Q was Sufficient for the purpose of extending credit on glass bottles which were inputs within the meaning of Rule 57A. We also hold similar view in the instant case and sustain the appellant's challenge against the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) denying Modvat credit on the ground that the declaration was not in terms of Rule 574 The appeal is, therefore, allowed. 5. The Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CCE SVs. Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. [2014(310) ELT 870 (Mad.)] referred to the above decision and held that iron and steel products, used for structural support by application of user test, become component of machineries and the credit cannot be denied stating that these ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t capital goods, They are either support structures or platforms, frames, foundations, and parts of civil structure not covered by the category of capital goods, In this regard, we find that learned Commissioner (Appeals) in Para 8.5 of the impugned order examined the nature and functions of each one of the impugned items specifically with reference to the scope of capital goods as per Rule 2 of Cenvat Credit Rules and came to the conclusion that these impugned goods can be classified into three groups namely the first group consists of Crane Girder Crane Rail, Crane Column, Crane Surge Girder and Crane Auxiliary Girder, The uses of these goods ill the respondent factory are that Crane Girder and Crane Rail are provided To hold the crane ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court had occasioned to consider the eligibility of credit on railway track material. The Hon'ble Court has observed as under:- 14. Applying the aforesaid test to the facts of this case, it is apparent that the use of railway tracks is related to the actual production of goods and without the use of the said railway track, commercial production would be inexpedient. 15. In the instant case, the manner in which railway track materials have been used by the appellant was explained by the appellant before the Commissioner and veracity thereof was accepted by the Commissioner. Therefore, without any fear of contradiction, we may note the exact process that is involved : These railway tracks used in transporting hot m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
