Appellant eligible for CENVAT credit on Mezzanine floor made with MS items. Penalty set aside, demand upheld.

The Tribunal held that the appellant was eligible for the CENVAT credit availed on MS items as the Mezannine floor, made using MS items, was integral to the manufacturing process. The penalty imposed on the reversed credit was set aside, while the demand for reversal was upheld. The appeal was allowed partly with specified reliefs.

---

---

Issues:
1. Irregular availment of CENVAT credit on MS items.
2. Whether Mezannine floor fabricated using MS items is integrally connected with the manufacturing process.
3. Imposition of penalty on reversed CENVAT credit.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing paints and varnishes, availed CENVAT credit on MS angles, beams, and bars irregularly. The Department alleged irregular availment of credit amounting to Rs. 1,90,759 for the period October 2008 to June 2009. The appellant reversed Rs. 62,418 of the credit upon identification of the irregularity. A show-cause notice was issued, leading to adjudication where the demand, interest, and penalty were confirmed. The Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the decision, prompting the appellant to appeal.

2. The appellant argued that the Mezannine floor, fabricated using MS items, is integral to the manufacturing process as it is used for storing packing materials necessary for completing the final product. They contended that without packing, the finished product cannot be cleared. The Department, however, asserted that the Mezannine floor cannot be considered an integral part of manufacturing.

3. The Tribunal examined the records and noted that the period in question was before the insertion of an explanation to the definition of inputs on 07/07/2009. The Mezannine floor, made using MS items, was deemed connected to the manufacturing of final products as it facilitated the packing process essential for product clearance. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the appellant was eligible for the credit availed on MS items. Regarding the penalty imposed on the reversed credit, the Tribunal found it unjustified based on a precedent and set aside the penalties while sustaining the demand of Rs. 62,418. The appeal was allowed partly with specified reliefs.

---