CESTAT: Are Storage Tank Silos 'Capital Goods' for Cenvat Credit? Case Update

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi addressed the issue of whether storage tank silos qualify as 'Capital Goods' for Cenvat Credit under Rule 2 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal considered the argument that silos, as immovable property, do not fall under the definition of goods. While referencing a previous case involving concrete silos, the Tribunal noted changes in the definition of 'Capital Goods'. Despite a partial deposit by the applicant, the Tribunal accepted it as sufficient for the appeal hearing, directing the deposited amount to be treated as pre-deposit, with the appeal set for a final hearing at a later date.

---

---

Issues involved: Interpretation of the term 'Capital Goods' under Rule 2 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 regarding storage tank silos.

Summary:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi dealt with the challenge against the Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding the classification of storage tank silos as 'Capital Goods' for Cenvat Credit. The definition of 'Capital Goods' under Rule 2 includes storage tanks, but it was argued that silos, being immovable property as they are constructed on land, do not qualify as goods. The Tribunal referenced a previous case where concrete silos were considered 'plant', but noted that 'plant' is no longer part of the definition of 'Capital Goods'. Despite a partial deposit made by the applicant, the Tribunal deemed it sufficient for hearing the appeal, directing the deposited amount to be treated as pre-deposit. The appeal was scheduled for final hearing at a later date.

---