TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 650X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the appellant is not eligible for the credit because under project import full machinery would have been imported and therefore MS plates/HR sheets must have been used for structurals. The submission made by the appellant regarding actual use of MS plates/HR sheets have not been considered at all. Moreover the fact that the appellant factory was being set up and therefore parts would have been fabricated has also not been taken into account. Impugned order suffers from non-consideration of all the submissions made by the appellants and the issues in proper perspective. - matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/3465/2012-DB, E/3553/2012-DB - Final Order Nos. 26575-26576/2013 - Dated:- 5-9-2013 - SHRI M.V. RAVINDRA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Chapter 84 of the CETA, 1985 by applying the Section Notes 3, 4 5 of the Section XVI. 2.1. Respondent has not appreciated the nature of the capital goods merely because steel items has been used in fabricating various machinery parts used in pre-heater cyclones, ducts, bins, hoppers, chutes, etc. would not disentitle it from the purview of capital goods or inputs as defined in the CENVAT Credit Rules. It is submitted that the manner in which the capital goods are put to use and their classification would determine if the said goods are capital goods, inputs or input services. There is no discussion in the impugned order on what is pre-heater cyclones, essentiality of cyclones, bins, hoppers, ducts, chutes, etc. or a silo (storage t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ] b) Commissioner V. Jawahar Mills Ltd. [2001 (132) E.L.T. 3 (SC)] c) UOI V. Associated Cement Company Ltd. [2011 (267) E.L.T. 55 (Chhattisgarh)] d) CCE V. India Cements Ltd. [2013 (l) TMI 5 - Madras] e) CCE V. SLR Steels Ltd. [2012 (280) ELT 176 (Kar.)] f) Metrochem Industries Ltd. V. CCE [2013 (292) E.L.T. 578 (Tri.-Ahmd.)] g) Ramala Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. V. CCE [2010 (260) E.L.T 321 (SC)] 4. Ongoing through the records and the impugned order we find considerable force in the submissions of the learned counsel that the Commissioner has failed to discuss the issues in detail. In fact on going through the order, we find that in para 15.4 of the impugned order the Commissioner has observed that the assessee had admitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
