Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2017 (9) TMI 268 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - goods used for fabrication of plant and machinery - Held that - the identical issues have come up before the Tribunal in appellant s own case M/s Dalmia Cements (Bharat) Ltd. Versus CCE & ST (LTU) New Delhi 2017 (3) TMI 1084 - CESTAT NEW DELHI where it was held that the goods fabricated using such structurals will have to be considered as parts of the relevant machines. The definition of Capital Goods includes components spares and accessories of such capital goods. Accordingly applying the User Test to the facts in hand we have no hesitation in holding that the structural items used in the fabrication of support structures would fall within the ambit of Capital Goods as contemplated under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules hence will be entitled to the Cenvat credit - credit allowed. CENVAT credit on capital goods - denial on the ground that appellant have not commenced production at the relevant time - Held that - There is no irregular utilization of credit by the appellant and no such allegation has been made in the show cause notice. Even if the appellant has entered the credit in their books of accounts no utilization is possible without commencement of production. In effect the credits available on the capital goods will come to be entered as availed and utilized only on production of dutiable final product. We find no justification to deny Cenvat credit on capital goods which are otherwise legitimately available to the appellant - credit allowed. CENVAT credit - input services - construction of factory - denial on the ground that construction is with reference to immovable property and accordingly the credit is not available - Held that - The credits availed by the appellant are with reference to construction of factory. The said activity is covered by the definition of input service during the relevant time. It is also to be noted that the definition of input service is very broad and includes those services which are used by the manufacturer whether directly or indirectly in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. It is clear that the said service even if used indirectly by the manufacturer in relation to manufacture of final product the same should be eligible for credit. Apart from this there is a specific inclusion of services used in relation to setting up of factory. The services availed by the appellants are covered by the definition of input service - Considering the scope of the definition of input service during the relevant time credit allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|