Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 356 - AT - Central ExciseAvailment of CENVAT Credit - Capital goods - MS Roads - Held that:- Issue was raised that M.S. Rod is not used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product, whereas the Commissioner (Appeals) have decided revenue s appeal going completely beyond the show cause notice on the ground that the tote boxes which are manufactured within the factory are exempted from payment of excise duty therefore in terms of Rule 6(1) of CCR Cenvat credit is not admissible. - Even if it is presumed that on the findings of the commissioner whether the Cenvat credit is admissible or not, I find that even if capital goods manufactured within the factory of the appellant and admittedly it is exempted, Cenvat credit in respect of input used in the manufacture of such exempted capital goods is permissible. As per CCR, 2004 the Cenvat Credit is allowed on the input as per the Rule 2K explanation (2) “input includes goods used in the manufacture of capital goods which are further used in the factory of the manufacture” In view of this provisions in the present case M.S. Rod have been used in the manufacture of the capital goods and the capital goods in the manufacture of the final product, Cenvat credit on M.S. Rod is admissible as input. In the fact of the present case, it is undisputed that the final product manufactured by the appellant is cleared on payment of duty and no exemption was availed, therefore contention of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is wrong as Rule 6(1) is applicable only when the final product is cleared under exemption. - appellant is legally entitle for the Cenvat credit in respect of M.S. Rod, therefore impugned order is not sustainable, hence the same is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.
|