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 overturns disallowance of Cenvat credit, emphasizes integral role of disputed items in machinery</h1> <h3>Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Jaipur-II</h3> Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise And Service Tax, Jaipur-II - TMI Issues:- Disallowance of Cenvat credit on various items by the Original Authority.- Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, Udaipur.- Applicability of the 'user test' to determine eligibility for Cenvat credit.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner disallowing Cenvat credit of a specific amount. This was the second round of litigation, with the impugned order being passed in pursuance of a previous order. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Lead and Zinc Concentrates and were availing Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods. The Original Authority disallowed a significant amount of credit and imposed penalties. The appeal challenged these decisions.2. The appellant's counsel argued that the Original Authority's findings against the verification report were unjustified. Specific references were made to the report indicating the usage of disputed items in manufacturing integral parts of various systems. The counsel contended that the disallowance was contrary to facts and cited relevant case laws supporting the appellant's eligibility for Cenvat credit.3. The Department's representative reiterated the Original Authority's findings but failed to justify the disallowance adequately. The nature, usage, and eligibility of the disputed items were examined category-wise. It was highlighted that the items in question were essential for the functioning of specific machinery and equipment. The Original Authority's conclusions were deemed unsustainable due to lack of proper justification.4. Various disputed items, such as drive base frames, technical structures, galvanized steel, cable trays, and angles, were scrutinized for their eligibility for Cenvat credit. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the use of these items in determining their eligibility, rather than solely relying on their classification. Precedents and case laws were cited to support the appellant's claim for Cenvat credit on these items.5. Applying the 'user test,' it was established that the disputed items formed an integral part of the overall capital goods used by the appellant. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments where similar items were deemed eligible for Cenvat credit. After a thorough examination of the facts and discussions presented, the Tribunal concluded that the impugned order was not sustainable and allowed the appeal.6. In the final decision, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, overturning the Original Authority's disallowance of Cenvat credit on various items. The detailed analysis highlighted the importance of considering the usage and integral role of disputed items in machinery and equipment to determine their eligibility for Cenvat credit.
TaxTMI 