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 cenvat credit was admissible on MS rods, sheets, channels, plates and flats used in fabrication of structurals for supporting machinery and whether the denial of credit by relying on the Larger Bench decision was justified.
Analysis: The impugned goods were used to fabricate structurals supporting crushers, kilns, hoppers and other machinery, and without such structurals the machinery could not be erected or function. The earlier decision in the assessee's own case had applied the user test and treated similar steel items used in erection of machinery as eligible for credit. The contrary decision relied on by the Revenue was held distinguishable on facts, since the present case involved goods used in fabrication of structural supports integral to the machinery and not mere construction material.
Conclusion: The denial of cenvat credit was not sustainable and the assessee was entitled to credit on the disputed goods.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed and the order of the Tribunal was set aside, resulting in relief to the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Steel items used in fabrication of structurals that are integral to the erection and functioning of machinery qualify for cenvat credit when they satisfy the user test and fall within the inclusive scope of capital goods or their parts and components.