9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 909X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed in the factory for final product captively which are exempted by way of Notifacation No. 67/95-CE dated 16.03.95. This issue is no more res integra and is covered in favour of the assessee in the case of Ritesh Trade Fin Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur [], where it was held that Plea that capital goods were not excisable goods as they were attached to earth to be irrelevant. Credit allowed - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - E/60488/2018 - 62996/2018 - Dated:- 14-9-2018 - Mr. S. S. Garg, Member (Judicial) ORDER Per : S.S.Garg The present appeal filed by the Department is directed against the impugned order dated 02.01.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Appeal), whereby the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 2,27,54,792/- had been availed by the appellants on such items of iron and Steel which did not appear to be admissible to the appellants as the same was not covered under the definition of capital goods under Rule 2(a) of the CENVAT credit Rules, 2004. Accordingly, the appellants were issued show cause notice No. 52/CE/Adj./HQ/SNP/2015 dated 25.06.2015 proposing to demand and recovery of CENVAT credit amounting to ₹ 43,25,538/- with interest besides proposing penal action. After following the due process, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Cenvat credit with interest and also imposed penalty. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed the appeal before the Commissioner who accepted the appeal and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the Tribunal some of them have been relied upon by the commissioner while allowing the appeal of the assessee. He further submitted that all the items of the iron and steel were used in the manufacture of capital goods which had been put to captive used in the factory for final product. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the following decisions Ritesh Trade Fin Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bolpur reported in 2005 (191) ELT 1065 (Tri. Kolkata), Union of India Vs. Associated Cement Companies Ltd. reported in 2015 (317) ELT 0044 (Chhattisgarh), Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow reported in 2013 (294) ELT 0581 (Tri.- Del.)2013 (199) ECR 0343 (Tri.- New Delhi), Commissioner of Central Ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
