Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (1) TMI 230 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

2017 (1) TMI 230 - CESTAT HYDERABAD - TMI - Denial of CENVAT credit - MS rods, Ms angles, channels, joists, beams, aluminium sheets etc. - denial for the reason that MS items like angles etc., do not fall within the definition of capital goods or inputs - Held that: - It is seen that the MS items have been used for fabrication of storage tanks which are used for storing water, chemicals, finished products, pulp etc. The definition of capital goods includes the word “storage tanks” - In the case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. P.S. Reddy, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent. ORDER Brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of paper and are availing the facility of CENVAT Credit on inputs and capital goods. A Show Cause Notice was issued covering the period April 2010 to January 2011 alleging that the appellant had availed irregular credit to the tune of ₹ 6,62,725/- on MS rods, Ms angles, channels, joists, beams, aluminium sheets etc., under the category of capita .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sed for fabrication/manufacture of storage tanks. An amount of ₹ 5,46,222/- was availed under the category of capital goods which was used for construction of silos, storage tanks which was used for storage of water, pulp, chemical tanks, vat for post calendar broke chest, common condensate tank, chemical solution preparation tank, reject tanks, vaccum separator tanks. That appellants produced a Chartered Engineer Certificate to establish the details and purpose for which the MS items were .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

goods and therefore credit ought to have been allowed. The Ld. Counsel relied upon the decision laid in the case of M/s India Cements Ltd., Vs CESTAT, Chennai reported in [2015-TIOL-650-HC-Mad-CX] and also the case of CCE, Mysore Vs M/s ICL Sugars Ltd., [2011 (271) ELT 360 (Kar)]. 3. On behalf of respondent the Ld. AR Sh. P.S. Reddy submitted that the MS items do not fall within the definition of capital goods or inputs and therefore the disallowance of credit is legal and proper. He submitted t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sought to be denied by the authorities below for the reason that MS items like angles etc., do not fall within the definition of capital goods or inputs. The department also relies upon the decision laid in M/s Vandana Global Ltd., (supra). On perusal of records it is seen that the appellant has stated in their reply to the SCN the details and purpose for which the MS items were used. It is seen that the MS items have been used for fabrication of storage tanks which are used for storing water, c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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