TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate authority allows Cenvat credit on steel inputs for manufacturing capital goods</h1> <h3>M/s. Indian Potash Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad</h3> M/s. Indian Potash Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad - TMI Issues:1. Availability of Cenvat credit on HR sheets, hot strip mill plates, and welding electrodes.2. Interpretation of judgments regarding the use of welding electrodes for maintenance and repair.3. Admissibility of Cenvat credit on various steel items used in the fabrication of capital goods.Analysis:Issue 1: Availability of Cenvat creditThe appellate authority ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the availability of Cenvat credit on HR sheets and hot strip mill plates, considering them as inputs used in the manufacture of capital goods, which are further utilized in the production of sugar and molasses. However, the authority denied Cenvat credit on welding electrodes used for maintenance and repair of machinery.Issue 2: Interpretation of judgments on welding electrodesThe judge referred to various High Court decisions, such as Ambuja Cements Eastern Ltd. vs. CCE, Hindustan Zinc vs. Union of India, and CCE, Bangalore-I vs. Alfred Herbert (India) Ltd., which supported the admissibility of Cenvat credit on welding electrodes used for maintenance and repair of machinery. The judge emphasized that these judgments are binding, and hence, the denial of Cenvat credit on welding electrodes was set aside.Issue 3: Admissibility of Cenvat credit on steel itemsThe Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the Cenvat credit on various steel items, including HR sheets, G.C. Sheets, Plates, and Channels, as they were used in the fabrication of capital goods. The judge upheld this decision, citing the judgment in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. vs. CCE, which held that if steel items are used in the manufacture of capital goods, they qualify for Cenvat credit. The Revenue's argument that the steel items were used for repair and maintenance was rejected, as they were deemed to be used in the fabrication of capital goods.In conclusion, the appellate authority allowed the assessee's appeal regarding the availability of Cenvat credit on steel items and rejected the Revenue's appeal. The judgments cited from various High Courts and the interpretation of relevant legal precedents played a crucial role in determining the admissibility of Cenvat credit on different items used in the manufacturing process.
TaxTMI 