Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellant made out a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery on the ground that Cenvat credit was admissible on inputs used in the manufacture of storage tanks treated as capital goods.
Analysis: Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 treats storage tanks as capital goods. Rule 2(k) further recognises that input includes goods used in the manufacture of capital goods which are further used in the factory of manufacture. On that basis, the fact that the storage tanks were used in the manufacturing process and were immovable property did not, by itself, take the case outside the credit scheme. The Tribunal also found support in the Karnataka High Court decision relied upon by the appellant.
Conclusion: The appellant established a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit, and recovery was stayed during pendency of the appeal.
Final Conclusion: Interim relief was granted in full in favour of the appellant, leaving the appeal to be heard on merits.
Ratio Decidendi: Inputs used in the manufacture of capital goods that are themselves used in the factory are eligible for Cenvat credit, and storage tanks fall within the definition of capital goods under the relevant rules.