Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Diamond Cements. Versus C.C.E. & ST Bhopal

2015 (11) TMI 553 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of CENVAT Credit - whether, the locomotive should be considered as an eligible item for the purpose of taking cenvat credit - Held that:- As per the definition, goods falling under chapter 82, 84, 85, 90 and the components, spares and accessories of the goods of the said chapters are considered as capital goods, on which the assessee is permitted to take cenvat credit. Since locomotive is classified under chapter 86, and the same is not fitted to any machine(s) of the above specified chap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f input, the locomotive cannot be denied the cenvat benefit. The case of the appellant gets support from the decision of larger bench of this Tribunal in the case of Banco Products (India) Ltd, wherein it has been held that Plastic crates used for transporting/ storing of goods in the factory will be considered as input for the purpose of Modvat credit, because in absence of proper storage and efficient movement of gods under the cover of plastic crates, the manufacturing activity will be affect .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 21.02.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise-Bhopal wherein Cenvat Credit denied on the locomotive in the Adjudication Order has been upheld. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is manufacturing cement and avails cenvat credit of Central Excise Duty paid on inputs and capital goods used in or in relation to manufacture of the said final product. The dispute involved in the present case is with regard to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y supply of raw material to the plant, the manufacture of cement would not be commercially viable. He further submits that locomotive used by the appellant for transportation of raw materials and finished goods are in relation to manufacture of final product. Thus, according to the Ld. Advocate, the central excise duty paid on the locomotive is eligible for cenvat credit to the appellant for utilization towards clearance of the final product. To justify his above stand, the Ld. Advocate has cite .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cause of its tariff classification. According to him, since locomotive is classified under chapter 86, which is neither capital goods by itself, nor the component, accessory or spare parts of any eligible machine, the said disputed item cannot be considered as capital goods as per the definition contained in Rule 2(a)(A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He further submits that since the locomotive is being used for shunting of the wagons at the railway siding for dispatch of cement, clinker etc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

les was very broad and extensive to take within its ambit almost all the goods used by the manufacturer. To justify his above stand, the Ld. Jt. CDR cited the decision in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. vs Commissioner of Cus. & C. Ex Jaipur, reported in 2009 (235) ELT 289 (Tri. Del). 5. Heard the Ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the records. 6. The short issue involved in the appeal for consideration by this Tribunal is, as to whether, the locomotive should be considered as an eli .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s, as component, spares or accessories, in my opinion, locomotive is not confirming to the definition of capital goods. Thus, cenvat credit on locomotive as capital will not be available to the appellant. In this regard, I find support from the decision of this Triubnal in the case of Hindustan Zinc Ltd. vs CCE Jaipur reported in 2009 (235) ELT 289 (Tri-Delhi). 7. The term input has been defined in Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. All goods (excepting certain few) used, in or in relat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version