Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (4) TMI 525 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of CENVAT Credit - Capital goods - goods not mentioned in declaration - Held that:- So far as the the Modvat Credit in respect of Steel items, namely, MS Angles, HR Coils, Black Steel Tubes, ER Wire Steel Plates etc., is concerned, the appellants claim backened by the certificate given by their Chief Engineer is that these items have been used either as parts of the Sugar Mill Machinery or as supporting Structure for the machinery and that in both the cases during period prior to 23.07.1996, the capital goods cenvat credit would be admissible as during period prior to 23.07.1996, the definition of capital goods also covered plant and the Tribunal in the case of Shakumbari Sugar and Allied Industries Ltd. vs CCE Meerut-I reported in [2013 (9) TMI 316 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] has held that since for the period prior to 23.07.1996, the definition of capital goods, as given in Rule 57 Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 covered plant, MS Angles, Channels, Section, Bars etc., used for making supporting structures for machinery would also be covered by the definition of capital goods and would be admissible for cenvat credit. However, as regards denial of Modvat Credit from period January 1997 to March 1997 in appeal E/2015/09, since during this period the definition of capital goods, as it existed during period prior to 23.07.1996 has been substituted by a new definition which covered the goods of certain specified chapter headings and as such for this period the iron and steel items would be eligible for credit as inputs only if the same had been used for manufacture of capital goods or their parts and would not be eligible for credit if the same had been used as foundation or supporting structure for machinery, the matter would have to be remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority after examining the appellants' plea on the question regarding their usage. The cenvat credit for this period would be admissible only in respect of that quantity of iron and steel which had been used for fabricating sugar mill machinery or its components. As regards denial of cenvat credit in respect of nickel screen and denial of cenvat credit in respect of gunny bags, the credit has been denied only on the ground that the same are not covered by the declaration. However, on going through the records, it is seen that this ground for denial is not factually correct as both the items are covered by the declarations filed by the appellant. Therefore, the denial of Modvat credit in respect of these items is set aside. As regards denial of the Modvat Credit in respect of Steel items for the period prior to 23.07.1996 and in respect of nickel screen and gunny bags is set aside. The part of the order denying the Modvat Credit in respect of Steel Items for period January 1997 to March 1997 is also set aside and this matter is remanded to Original Adjudicating Authority for de novo decision after hearing the appellant regarding the use of steel items. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|