9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of India Cements Ltd. Vs. CES TAT [2015 (3) TMI 661 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], wherein the Hon'ble Madras High court has held that MS angles, channels etc. used for supporting structures is eligible for credit - The second contention of the Department is that the explanation which restricts the use of MS items for fabrication introduced in the definition of inputs is applicable retrospectively as laid by Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. [2010 (4) TMI 133 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI (LB)] - following the ratio laid in the above judgments, I hold that the denial of credit is unjustified. The availment of credit wrongly by taking 100% credit in the same financial year - Held that: - taking note of the fact th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... items. The period involved and the demand of these show-cause notices are detailed below:- Sl. No. SCN dt. Amount demanded period covered Issue in brief 1. 01/03/2008 Rs.3,75,086/- ₹ 18,83,061/- 02/07 to 03/07 Irregular availment of CENVAT credit on capital goods. Excess credit taken the remaining in advance 2. 19/05/2008 Rs.4,53,056/- 06/07 to 09/07 and 12/07 to 02/08 Irregular availment of CENVAT credit on TM T bars / TOR steel rounds etc. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pointed out that the appellant vide letter dt. 03/07/2007 had submitted the details of capital goods for which the subject items were used. He argued that credit is admissible either as capital goods or as inputs used for fabrication of capital goods. He referred to the definition of inputs contained in CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 and pointed out that the credit was availed prior to 07/07/2009 and therefore the denial of credit is not legal and proper. 4. On behalf of the Department, the learned AR Shri Gunaranjan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He contended that the subject items used by the appellant included TOR bars which are generally used in construction activity only and that therefore the credit has been correctly den ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit. The issue has been also analysed in various other cases. The second contention of the Department is that the explanation which restricts the use of MS items for fabrication introduced in the definition of inputs is applicable retrospectively as laid by Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (supra) . The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CCE, Jaipur Vs. Rajasthan Spinning Weaving Mills Ltd. [2010-TlOL-51-SC-CX] applying the user test, held that steel plates and MS channels used for fabrication of capital goods is eligible for credit. In Ramala Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE, Meerut-I [2016(334) ELT 3 (SC)], the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that the word include in the definition of 'inpu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
