Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2023 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 870 - AT - Central ExciseReversal of CENVAT Credit - Ms Angles, MS Beam and other MS Items which have gone into the capital goods used in factory premises - inputs used in the High Mast Tower on account of capital goods - address has by mistake been given as HPCL, Mumbai (their Head Office) - HELD THAT:- It is seen from the Certificate issued by the Chartered Engineer that the MS Items have been used within the factory premises for completion of the EPC Project within the factory premises. The Tribunal in the case of M/S. MADRAS CEMENTS LTD. VERSUS CCE, HYDERABAD [2016 (6) TMI 761 - CESTAT HYDERABAD] has held credit is admissible on MS items used for fabrication of structural supports. Such supports and fixation is necessary for functioning of the plant/machinery/equipment without movement and vibration without which the process of manufacturing could not be done. In the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., TIRUNELVELI VERSUS INDIA CEMENTS LTD. [2006 (1) TMI 445 - CESTAT, CHENNAI], the Tribunal has held The ratio arrived at in various decisions/judgments referred to by the ld. Counsel for the Respondents has made it clear that the components spares etc. used for Generator set, cursher plant, conveyor system etc. are eligible capital equipment and credit in respect of them is admissible under Rule 57Q(1) of the C.E. Rules, 1944. In the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., TIRUNELVELI VERSUS INDIA CEMENTS LTD. [2005 (8) TMI 274 - CESTAT, CHENNAI], the Tribunal has held there is no dispute of the fact that the capital goods in question were used as parts/components of cement-manufacturing plant. During the material period, parts and components of ‘plant’ were recognised as eligible capital goods for Modvat credit under clause (b) of Explanation (1) to Sub-rule (1) of Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The lower appellate authority has rightly allowed capital goods credit to the respondents. Following the ratio of the cited case law, the Cenvat Credit of Rs.62,82,025/- on MS Angles, MS Beam and other items on which the Cenvat Credit has taken is allowed. On the same ground, the Cenvat Credit of Rs.26,201/- taken on inputs used for fabrication of High Mast Tower is allowed. In respect of Rs.10,146/- since the Invoice has been made in the name of HPCL, Mumbai (the Head office), this is only a clerical error and does not prevent the Appellant from taking the Cenvat Credit, since there is no dispute about their usage by the Appellant - In respect of Radha Krishna Transport, there is no necessity of the transporter to indicate the Service Tax Registration Number. As a matter of fact, in case of GTA services, the Service Tax has to be paid on Reverse Charge basis by the recipient of the service. Therefore, the Cenvat Credit on 33,900/- is allowed. The impugned order towards the confirmed demands along with interest and penalties set aside - appeal allowed.
|