Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 451 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - capital goods - items used in the maintenance of captive power plant - denial of credit on the ground that Captive Power Plant (CPP) was a turnkey project which was not excisable goods and therefore not covered within the definition of “capital goods” - denial of credit also on the ground that CPP generates electricity which is not an excisable product and therefore no credit is eligible on capital goods exclusively used for generation of electricity - HELD THAT:- The issue is with regard to the credit availed under the category of ‘capital goods’ or items which were used for repair and maintenance of the captive power plant intended for generation of electricity. Tribunal for different periods in CHETTINAD CEMENT CORPORATION LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (TRICHY) , COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, LTU (CHENNAI) [2016 (12) TMI 218 - CESTAT, CHENNAI] and M/S. MADRAS CEMENTS LTD VERSUS CCE, TRIICHY [2017 (1) TMI 1589 - CESTAT CHENNAI] had remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the issue on the basis of decisions cited. The Division Bench had set aside the penalty while remanding the matter. Following the decisions of the Tribunal in the appellant’s own case for different periods, the matter requires to be remanded to the adjudicating authority who is directed to conduct de novo adjudication and consider the eligibility of credit on the basis of principles laid down in the decisions cited above. Taking note of the fact that the issue is interpretational and appellant has not done any deliberate act to evade duty, the penalty requires to be set aside. Appeal is partly allowed by remand to the adjudicating authority.
|