TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 836X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich are further used in the factory of the manufacturer should also be considered as inputs. The documents/records submitted by the appellant clearly demonstrate that the goods in question were used for erection/manufacture of various capital goods namely clinkerisation plant, power plant etc., installed within the factory of manufacture of cement. Thus, as per the definition of inputs contained in Rule 2(k) ibid, the appellant should be eligible for the CENVAT benefit on the disputed goods used for manufacture of capital goods. The denial of CENVAT benefit on the disputed goods should not stand for judicial scrutiny, as against rules framed in the CENVAT Statute - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Central Excise Appeal No. 34 of 2009, 35 of 2009, 937 of 2009, 941 of 2009 - Final Order No. 30584-30587/2020 - Dated:- 18-2-2020 - HON'BLE MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND HON'BLE MR. P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Mr. S. Parthasarathy, Consultant for the appellant. Mr B. Guna Ranjan, Authorized Representative for the respondent. ORDER PER: S.K. MOHANTY These appeals are directed against impugned orders dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lation of the said capital goods, the benefit of input credit should be available on the disputed goods used/utilised for such intended purpose. With regard to availment of 50% of CENVAT credit on the capital goods in the financial year of their receipt, he submits that the appellant had never availed the disputed credit under the Head capital goods and the entire credit has been availed under the Head inputs . He has relied upon the judgement of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Vs CCE [2017-TIOL-1357-HC-MAD-CX) and the final order dated 28.02.2019 passed by the Chennai Bench of CESTAT in the appellant s own appeal bearing No. 40400/2019 dated 28.02.2019, to state that denial of CENVAT credit on the disputed goods cannot be sustained for judicial scrutiny. 4. On the other hand, the learned A.R. appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides and perused the case records. 6. We have examined the case records including various statements submitted by the appellant, which are annexed to the appeal memorandum. We find that on receipt of the disputed goods, the appellant had availed CENVAT cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods used for manufacture of capital goods. 8. With regard to availment of CENVAT credit on the disputed goods, the issue is no more res integra in view of judgement relied upon by the learned consultant for the appellant. The Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd (supra) have held that various structural items used to erect foundations should fall under the scope and ambit of the definition of input (effective up to 07.07.2009) for availing CENVAT benefit. The relevant paragraphs in the said judgement are extracted herein below: 31. A close reading of the definition of 'input' in Rule 2k(i) would show that it includes all goods (except light diesel oil, high speed diesel oil and motor spirit, which are commonly known as petrol), which are used in or in relation to manufacture of final products , (whether directly or indirectly, whether contained in the final product or not), albeit, within the factory of production. Explanation 2 only states that 'input' includes goods used in the manufacture of capital goods, which are further used in the factory of the manufacturer. 31.1. A close reading of the main provision with Explan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal vide final order dated 28.02.2019 has also extended the CENVAT benefit on the disputed goods, by considering the same as inputs. The relevant paragraphs in the said decision are also extracted herein below: 6.2 Although it is alleged in the Show Cause Notice that the goods did not fall within the definition of inputs , the reason for which the Credit has been disallowed is that after assembly and installation of such items, they become immovable property and therefore, are not 11 eligible for Credit. From the Show Cause Notice as well as the impugned Order, it is seen that various items were used for setting up of the cement plant. Many of these items are components or small parts which go into assembly, installation or commissioning of machines and equipment. As per Explanation-2 of the definition of inputs, as it stood during the relevant period, input includes the goods used in the manufacture of capital goods which are further used in the factory of the manufacturer. Thus, all those items which are brought into the factory and used for the manufacture of capital goods, which are further used for the manufacturing activity, would be eligible for Credit. 6.3 The Dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
