Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (10) TMI 229 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit – Capital Goods or inputs - credit on Racks - Revenue was of the view that the item could not be considered as an accessory of any machinery in their factory and would not qualify to be capital goods as per the definition of the said expression under Rule 2 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - Held that:- Following Banco Products (India) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara [2009 (2) TMI 101 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] - There is nothing in the definition of input, which would exclude an item like racks from the scope of the definition - Such construction can be achieved only by relying on the old understanding of the word inputs ignoring the legal definition given under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, which is not a proper approach - the credit claimed by the appellant was allowed and the orders of the lower authorities set aside - the items will squarely fall within the definition of inputs and it will not be justified to deny credit on these items - They have taken credit on these items by classifying the same as capital goods but that by itself cannot be reason to deny credit when they are eligible for credit by classifying it as inputs – Decided in favour of Assessee.
|