Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2022 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (12) TMI 132 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - capital goods - Cement, TMT bars, MS angles, channels, beams, racks, plates, etc. used for making foundation of machineries installed in the factory premises and for making structure for support of the plant and machinery - period April 2008 to April, 2010 - Rule 2(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - credit was denied mainly on the ground that the amendment in Rule 2(a) brought by notification no. 16/2009-CE (N.T.) barred the availment of cenvat credit on the goods in question from retrospective effect - HELD THAT:- Reliance placed in larger bench judgment of the tribunal in the case of VANDANA GLOBAL LTD. VERSUS CCE [2010 (4) TMI 133 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI (LB)]. In this regard, we find that much water was flown on this issue and not only the VANDANA GLOBAL LTD. larger bench judgment was upset by the Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of M/S VANDANA GLOBAL LIMITED AND OTHERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, CENTRAL EXCISE [2018 (5) TMI 305 - CHHATTISGARH, HIGH COURT] but also by various subsequent judgment mainly by jurisdictional high court in the case of MUNDRA PORTS AND SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS [2015 (5) TMI 663 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. In view of the legal position, the amendment of notification no.16/2009-CE (N.T.) was held to be inapplicable for the period prior to the date of notification i.e. 07.07.2009. On this ground, the denial of cenvat credit by the adjudicating authority is not legal and correct. Period post 07.07.2009 - it is the submission of the appellant that the credit subsequent to this date was already taken prior to 07.07.2009 - HELD THAT:- The credit was already accrued before the amendment of Rule 2(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 therefore, the amendment of notification no. 16/2009-CE (N.T.) shall not apply on such credit which was accrued prior to 07.07.2009. Moreover, the appellant have claimed the credit under capital goods. Such capital goods were as parts and components used as support structure for plant and machinery erected and installed in the factory of the appellant. On this ground also the credit is admissible to the appellant accordingly, we are of the considered view that appellant are entitled for cenvat on the goods in question as per the settled legal position in the various judgments cited by them particularly in the case of Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court judgment in VANDANA GLOBAL LTD. and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MUNDRA PORTS & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD. The impugned order is not sustainable hence, the same is set aside - Appeal allowed.
|