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>Tribunal Grants CENVAT Credit for Construction Materials, Waives Predeposit</h1> <h3>Ultratech Cement Ltd Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Service Tax And Customs, Bangalore-II</h3> The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing CENVAT Credit on steel and cement used in the construction of Storage Sylos. The decision was ... Waiver of pre deposit - Denial of CENVAT Credit - Credit availed in respect of Storage Sylos - Held that:- appellant may have a case for the benefit of CENVAT credit in respect of steel and cement in view of the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka referred to above. As regards the Packing Plant, the appellants have already deposited the entire amount of CENVAT Credit with interest. Treating this as sufficient, the requirement of predeposit of balance dues is waived and stay against recovery is granted during the pendency of appeal. - Stay granted. Issues:1. Denial of CENVAT Credit on steel and cement used in the construction of Packing Plant and Storage Sylos.2. Interpretation of relevant provisions and case laws regarding CENVAT Credit eligibility.3. Applicability of previous judgments on the current case.Analysis:1. The appellant's CENVAT Credit of Rs. 41,51,419/- for the period from July 2009 to April 2010 was denied and demanded with interest and penalty. The credit was availed on steel and cement used in the construction of a Packing Plant and Storage Sylos. An amount of Rs. 24,27,751/- with interest was paid, attributed to the Packing Plant. However, for the demand related to CENVAT Credit on Storage Sylos, the appellant relied on a decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, emphasizing that only 'inputs' used in the manufacture or construction of capital goods are eligible for credit. The High Court's observations supported the appellant's eligibility for the benefit based on the nature of construction and usage of steel and cement.2. The learned A.R. referred to the case of Vikram Cement Vs CCE Indore [2005(187)ELT 145 (SC)] to argue against the appellant's eligibility for CENVAT Credit. However, the Tribunal found this argument unconvincing as the mentioned case was from a period when storage tanks were not considered part of the capital goods. The Tribunal also dismissed the distinction made by the A.R. between a sylo and a storage tank, indicating a prima facie case for the appellant's benefit based on the High Court's decision. In light of the appellant's payment related to the Packing Plant, the Tribunal waived the predeposit requirement for the balance dues and granted a stay against recovery during the appeal process.3. The Tribunal, after considering the observations of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and the arguments presented, found prima facie merit in the appellant's case for CENVAT Credit on steel and cement used in the construction of Storage Sylos. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by the interpretation of relevant provisions and previous judgments, indicating a favorable stance towards granting the benefit to the appellant. The order was pronounced in open court, reflecting the Tribunal's decision to support the appellant's claim for CENVAT Credit based on the legal interpretations and precedents cited during the proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
