TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri S. Muthu Venkataraman, Adv., for the appellant Ms. Indira Sisupal, JDR, for the respondent Per: 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, Squares, Round bars, Steel Tubes etc., falling under Chapter 72 on the ground that these were inputs for capital goods. On an appeal by the department, the lower appellate authority has set aside the order of the original authority relying on the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riod of limitation and penalty provisions are not invokable. 4. Ms. Indira Sisupal,Ld. DRappearing for the department states that the lower appellate authority has rightly applied the ratio of the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana 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). She further states that while granting credit the original authority has not verified as to whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecome spares and accessories of the machinery. Such observations point to the fact that both the authorities below have not examined the matter in detail, with reference to the impugned items involved and the various uses to which these have been put to, to arrive at a proper conclusion. Hence, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original authority for fresh examination in the light of the ratio of the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (supra) and to pass a fresh order. He shall allow a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants who will be at liberty to raise the question of applicability of extended period of time limit and penal liability. 6. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
