2016 (2) TMI 363 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate Tribunal allows capital goods credit for manufacturing without ownership requirement.

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was entitled to capital goods credit for manufacturing purposes, ... Cenvat Credit on capital goods purchased by the Job worker on behalf of principal manufacture endorsed invoice - Job worker had not taken the credit of the duty paid on the capital goods - Held that:- Endorsement as above not being in dispute by Revenue as is apparent from show-cause notice that establishes the fact that appellant was consignee of the capital goods. Therefore, there should not be dispute to grant capital goods credit to the appellant in whose factory the said goods were installed and used for manufacture of the goods for the appellant. It may be stated that law does not prescribe that the claimant of capital goods credit should necessarily be owner thereof. - Credit allowed - Decided in favor of assessee. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal, stating that the appellant was entitled to capital goods credit as the goods were used for manufacturing. The tribunal noted that the appellant was the consignee of the capital goods, and ownership was not a requirement for claiming credit. The decision was in favor of the appellant.