Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (1) TMI 869

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri P. K. Choudhary, Hon ble Judicial Member Shri D. Halder, Asstt. Commr. (A.R.) for the Revenue Shri Praveen Katoch, Sr. DGM (Excise) for the Respondent ORDER Per Shri P. K. Choudhary This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No.24-25/CE/BBSR II/2016 dated 31.05.2016 passed by Commr. of Central Excise (Appeals), Cus. S.Tax, BBSR. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Assessee- Respondent is engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel products classifiable under Chapter 72 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 3. A Show Cause Notice was issued proposing to deny the Cenvat Credit on Welding Electrodes, Welding Machine, Concrete Sleeper and Safet .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of this should be admissible. In case of safety Helmet, the appellant submits that, it is an essential requirement, expressed as Duty Care principle, which implies planning for prevention of work place accidents, injuries and illness. Hence, Helmet clearly qualifies the conditions given in the input. The Appellant had submitted various case ruling in the matter of above impugned input (i) Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. UOI reported in 2008 (228) ELT 517 (Raj.) (ii) Ambuja Cements Eastern Ltd. Vs. CCEx, Raipur reported in 2010 (256) ELT 690 (Chhattisgarh) (iii) CCE, Kolkata Vs. Hindustan Engineering Industries Ltd. reported in 2011 (264) ELT 161 (Kolkata) (iv) Gobind Sugars Mills Ltd. Vs. CCE Lucknow vide Final Order No.467-470/2011 SM (BR) d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons made by either side. The issue is whether credit is admissible on MBC sleepers. The allegation in the show cause notice is that these are used for foundation and therefore, credit is not admissible. The appellants have put forward a consistent plea regarding the use of MBC sleepers within the factory. It is used for transportation of raw material and finished product. The use as explained by the learned counsel makes it clear that these are essential and integrally connected to the process of manufacture. In addition, the judgments relied by the appellant and stated supra have held that credit is admissible on Railway tracks/sleepers used within the factory for transportation of raw materials and finished goods. Following the ratio laid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates