TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls, there is no effective challenge from the revenue side nor there is any contrary evidence - assessee had used identical products for fabrication of sugar manufacturing equipment was involved – Appeal rejected - 1084/2009 - 32/2011 - Dated:- 5-1-2011 - Shri M. V. Ravindran, J. Present for the appellant : Shri K.S. Chandrasekhar, JDR Present for the respondent : S/Shri P. Dakshinamurthy and K. S. Naveen Kumar, Advocates Per : M. V. RAVINDRAN This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. 19/2009 (G) (D) CE dated 30.09.2009, passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax (Appeals), Guntur. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the respondent has a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ital goods. It is the submission that further use of these goods as capital goods cannot be considered as capital goods and the Cenvat credit should not be allowed. He relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Nava Bharat Ferro Alloys Ltd. Vs. CCE,Hyderabad[2004 (174) E.L.T. 375 (Tri.-Bang.)] and more specifically paragraphs 10, 11 12 of the said decision (which are reproduced herein below) : 10. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. We find that coal bunkers are used temporarily in the boiler for storage of crushed coal. Therefore these coal bunkers cannot be considered as part of boiler or the power plant. Therefore, the lower authorities have correctly denied the Modvat credit on coal bunkers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny deficiency in the order of Commissioner (Appeals). 11. Regarding rejection of credit on columns of heavy fabricated structures and bracings, we find that the lower authorities have given the finding that columns and bracings are in the nature of construction material. Going by the nature of the material and the nature of their use, these do not fit into definition of capital goods. We find that the same view has been taken by the Tribunal in case of Malavika Steel Ltd. v. CCE, Allahabad (supra) and Vivek Alloys Ltd. v. CCE, Coimbatore [1998 (98) E.L.T. 156]. The appellant had claimed that the columns and bracings of heavy fabricated structures are used for supporting columns for boiler. We find that such structures are not covered ei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore these are not eligible for credit as capital goods. Regarding the appellant s claim that these may be allowed as inputs, under Rule 57A, the Commissioner (Appeals) has given the finding that these are not the subject-matter of the present proceedings and the appellant may take up the matter with the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner/Dy. Commissioner separately who may consider the same and pass the appropriate order. We find that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is correct in law. We do not find any reason to interfere with it. In the circumstances all the three appeals are rejected. He also relies on the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in Vikram Cement Vs. CCE,Indore[2006 (194) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] and more specifically pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orities. He relies upon the judgment of this Bench in the case of Vishwanath Sugars Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise,Belgaum[2009 (236) E.L.T. 289 (Tri.-Bang.)]. 5. I have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. The issue involved is whether the appellant was correct in availing Cenvat credit of Central Excise duty paid on HR Coils/plates, MS Plates, MS Angles, MS Channels, etc. undisputedly fall under Chapter 72 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. It is seen from the records that there are concurrent findings of the lower authorities that these goods were used by the respondent for manufacture / fabrication of blending vessel and heating coil pipeline. There is also a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
