TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... very same goods, which are the subject matter of the impugned proceedings, were used to manufacture these capital goods. Their report just mentions that such inputs can be used in manufacturing of capital goods, as well as for laying foundation/structures also. However, CENVAT Credit is available only for those inputs which were used in production/manufacturing of end products. Therefore, this report cannot be made basis to establish that the goods under the impugned proceedings were used for making of capital goods, pollution control equipment or in repair maintenance of capital goods. Thus, he held that CENVAT credit of ₹ 20,07,588/- availed by the assessee on such items is not admissible to them. Extended period of limitation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Advocate for the appellant. Shri Ravi Kapoor, Authorised Representative for the respondent. ORDER The issue involved in this appeal is- i) regarding disallowance of ₹ 35,57,776/- as Cenvat Credit on alleged ineligible capital goods viz. M.S. Bars/Rods/Angles/Channels/Beams, H.R. Coils, Lubricating Oils, M.S. Girder/ Shape and Sections, etc. and ii) Disallowance of cenvat credit of ₹ 36,232/- on alleged improper documents (commercial invoices), which appear to be not specified documents as prescribed under Rule 9 of CCR. 2. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). This is the 2nd round of litigation. Before proceeding, it is beneficial to reproduce the findings o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on number, which is an essential requirement for availment of cenvat credit. Further, it is held that invoices do not contain the necessary information, as prescribed under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, such as name of Commissionerate Division, and Range of the Commissionerate. Accordingly, this amount was held not admissible. 6. As regards the amount of ₹ 35,47,148/- with respect to the M.S. Bars/rods/channels, etc., it was observed that the appellant/assessee has already reversed the cenvat credit amounting to ₹ 4,24,398/- with respect to the TMT Bars and ₹ 11,15,162/- in respect of materials used in construction of shed of EOT crane. Thus, the Court Below was considering the balance credit of ₹ 20,07,588 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rhead crane is working, there is a possibility of laternal movement of the overhead crane. Thus, gantry grinders and box griders hold the overhead crane in position properly so that the overhead crane is able to move at a required height. Crane Columns function to transfer the handled load in the form of scrap from the ground to induction furnace and molten material in ladle from induction furnace to continuous casting machine, and billet from continuous casting machine to billet section and loading of billet from billet section to loading truck. Thus, these overhead cranes are working by combined action of axial force and bending movement. In view of their use, all these goods are essential accessories for EOI crane installed in the factor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the said amount of cenvat credit is ₹ 35,43,148/- is not eligible and it is held to be recoverable. The amount reversed of ₹ 15,35,360/- was appropriated. It is also held that the appellant is required to pay interest and further penalty was also imposed under Rule 15 as well as Section 11 AC. However, the amount was not quantified. 10. As regards the extended period of limitation, it was observed that the appellant have not put forth any evidence to suggest that they have informed the Department in this regard for having taken cenvat credit on the items in dispute. Further, these were detected during inspection by the officers of the AE Team. Further, it is held that extended period of limitation has been rightly i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tial for fabrication of the capital goods and such capital goods are necessary for manufacture of the finished goods, which are dutiable. However, only on the assumption that the appellant /assessee has not established one-to-one correlation, the credit has been dis-allowed, as observed. 14. It is nowhere the case of the Revenue that the appellant have not filed the periodical returns or left any material information as required under such returns as blank . Thus, the finding of the court below that the appellant have not separately informed the Revenue is a bald allegation, having no legs to stand. 15. Accordingly, it may be held that the extended period of limitation is also not applicable, as admittedly the show cause notice has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
