Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2009 (10) TMI 817

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 009 while delivering the order on 23-7-2009 [2009 (242) E.L.T. 545 (Tri-Del.)] and drawing our attention to the decisions in the matter of Union Carbide India Ltd. v. CCE., Calcutta-I reported in 1996 (86) E.L.T. 613 (Tribunal), Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. CCE., Delhi-III reported in 2009 (240) E.L.T. 641 (S.C.), U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. v. CCE., Meerut-I reported in 2009 (241) E.L.T. 558 (Tri-Delhi), Hindustan Zinc Ltd. v. UOI reported in 2008 (228) E.L.T. 517 (Raj.), unreported orders dated 25-2-2009 in stay application No. 178 of 2009 in the matter of M/s S.K.S Ispat Power Ltd. v. CCE., Raipur and the definition of the term input as is found in the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 along with the modified definition in terms of Notificatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Union of India v. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. reported in 2007 (214) E.L.T. 510 (Raj.) and the order of the Hon ble Supreme Court dismissing the SLP against the said order [2007 (214) E.L.T. A115 (S.C.)]. 5. We have also perused the written synopsis filed on behalf of the appellants. 6. Undoubtedly, the Commissioner has held that the Cenvat credit is not admissible in relation to the huge machineries which cannot be considered as inputs entitled to avail Cenvat credit and further the Commissioner also held that the appellants are undertaking the repair and maintenance works in the existing plant and therefore the Cenvat credit would not be admissible in relation to goods used for such purpose .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... liances, tools etc. would necessarily embrace within their ambit parts, components or spare parts of such machines, and, therefore, the exclusion clause would apply. This is denied on behalf of assessee. On this aspect also there are conflicting decisions of various Benches of the Tribunal. We have adverted to those decisions already 20. It is admitted that all the goods in respect of which claim is made by the manufacturer in these appeals are specified inputs and their final products are specified final products. It is contended for the department that while parts and components of machines are inputs as defined in Rule 57A of the Rules where machines are the final products, they are not inputs for the purpose of Rule 57A of the R .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... entially on the aspect that the goods so utilized need not be either the ingredients or commodities used in the process of or directly or actually need for bringing out the final product but must be essentially someway related to such process. Merely because the goods are used for repairs of the machineries that itself does not lead to the conclusion that the same is in relation to or in the process of manufacture of the final product and that is what has been explained in detailed in Vikram Cement case after taking note of various judgment including the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in the matter of Hindustan Zinc case. The later judgment of the Hindustan Zinc case to which attention was drawn and stated that the SLP against the sam .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issed. In terms of the impugned order, appellants are required to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,70,89,749/- besides in rest and equal amount of penalty. 12. Though, we find no case has been made out for grant of stay of the impugned order, in view of the right of appeal, it would be justifiable to give opportunity to the appellant in that regard as it is statutorily available and bearing the same in mind, it would be in fairness in the facts and circumstances of the case and the amount involved in the matter, to waive the requirement of deposit in relation to the interest and penalty amount at this stage. 13. In the result, therefore, the application is partly allowed. The appellants are required to deposit the amount of Rs. 2,70,89,749/- with .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates