Catalyst used only to speed up manufacture qualifies as input, not capital goods, for Cenvat credit.

A sulphuric acid catalyst used only to facilitate and accelerate the manufacturing process was held to be an input, not capital goods, for Cenvat credit purposes. The Tribunal relied on prior decisions and the absence of contrary authority, and the High Court found no legal infirmity in that approach. As the catalyst did not qualify as capital goods, the assessee's Cenvat credit claim on that basis failed and the appellate order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether sulphuric acid catalyst used in the manufacture of sulphuric acid was eligible to be treated as capital goods for Cenvat credit, or whether it was only an input.

Analysis: The catalyst was used to accelerate the chemical process in the sulphuric acid plant. The adjudicating authority had treated it as an input, while the first appellate authority had treated it as capital goods. The Tribunal, relying on prior decisions and the absence of any contrary authority, held that the catalyst could only be regarded as an input. The High Court found no legal infirmity in that view and noted that the Tribunal had consistently taken the same position, including in the assessee's own earlier matter.

Conclusion: The catalyst was not capital goods and the Cenvat credit claim as capital goods failed; the issue was decided in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appellate order was upheld and the substantial questions of law were answered against the assessee, resulting in dismissal of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a catalyst is used only to facilitate or accelerate the manufacturing process, it is to be treated as an input and not as capital goods for Cenvat credit purposes.

---