TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (1) TMI 262
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Heard both sides. For the reasons recorded below, we waive the requirement of predeposit and proceed to decide the appeal itself, with the consent of both sides. 2. The original authority has allowed cenvat credit in respect of the impugned steel items such as MS Sheets, MS Angles, MS Plates, MS Channels, MS Flats, Beams, Joining Sheets, HR Coils, Squar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Tribunal s decision in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (supra). He also relies on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Salem Vs. Madras Alulminium Co. Ltd. 2010 (259) ELT 738 (Tri.- Chen.) to state that the credit in respect of all structural items cannot be denied. He, however, agrees for remand of the case to the original authority to enable detailed examination in respect of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ana Global Ltd (supra) which holds that no cenvat credit is admissible in respect of structural items. She also relies on the decision of the Hon ble high Court of Orissa in the case of Jindal Stainless Ltd. Vs. Union of India 2010 (257) ELT 401 (Ori.), which did not allow the prayer of the petitioner therein to set aside the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (supra).....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....chinery as is evident from para-49 and para-50 thereof. In this case we find that while the lower appellate authority has merely stated that the impugned materials were used as support structures or to enhance the support structure, he has not examined the contention raised by the appellants that they have used the impugned goods for fabricating parts and components of machinery and capital goods.....