TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1121X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating Authority to decide afresh after examining the use of these items - appeal allowed by way of remand. - E/756/11 - FO/A/75054/2017 - Dated:- 17-1-2017 - Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member(Judicial) Shri D.K.Jha, Consultant for the Appellant Shri A.K.Biswas, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue ORDER Per: Shri P. K. Choudhary M/s.Tinplate Co. of India Ltd., the appellant herein have preferred this appeal against the de novo order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur on 25.05.2011, wherein MODVAT credit amounting to ₹ 4,27,662/- availed on CRSS and HR coils and ₹ 72,037/- availed on Copper Cathode is disallowed and penalty of ₹ 6,52,623.73 imposed under Rule 57U and ₹ 50,000/- under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et proper properties of annealing these covers are very essential spares and spares of annealing furnaces. 2.2 Similar Copper cathodes are used in the conductor rolls shop giving copper coating to the conductor rolls to avoid damage of rolls caused by the friction in conductor rolls during the process of rolling. 2.3 The appellants had recorded these items originally in capital goods Cenvat register and subsequently removed to input register. 2.4 The ld.Consultant submitted that the ld.Commissioner has failed to appreciate that the cover box manufactured from CRSS sheets and HR Coils are for the manufacturing of special type of cover boxes required for annealing purposes and such items are not available in the market. Hence they ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pacities to fabricate replaced spares when the same is normally available in the market at a lesser cost. Accordingly CRSS Coils, HR Coils do not qualify either as capital goods as defined or as inputs as per Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and hence Cenvat Credit cannot be allowed. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. 5. On perusal of the impugned order, I find that the Adjudicating Authority observed that the explanation given by the appellant cannot be accepted as no evidence could be produced to prove their contention. It is further observed that no documentary evidence regarding receipt, issue and consumption in conductor roll shop, as claimed by the appellant, has not been given before the Adjudicating A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
