Cenvat credit on pipeline and SBM capital goods could not be decided before determining whether they formed part of the factory premises.

Cenvat credit on pipeline and SBM-related capital goods could not be finally decided while the foundational question whether the pipeline and Single Buoy Mooring formed part of the factory premises remained pending before the original authority. Because the registration proceedings had already remanded that premises issue and no fresh determination had been made, the credit entitlement dispute was premature for final adjudication. The tribunal also noted the attempted distinction between earlier Modvat authorities and the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, but declined to rule on credit eligibility until the factory-premises question was resolved. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision after the registration issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the denial of Cenvat credit on pipeline and SBM-related capital goods could be finally adjudicated when the question whether the pipeline and SBM formed part of the factory premises was still pending before the original authority.

Analysis: The dispute on credit depended on the factual and legal determination whether the pipeline and Single Buoy Mooring were within the factory premises or outside it. That foundational question had already been remanded in the registration proceedings and no fresh decision had yet been taken by the jurisdictional authority. In that situation, the credit controversy could not be conclusively resolved on merits. The order also noted the distinction sought to be drawn between earlier Modvat-based decisions and the later Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, but found it unnecessary to decide the credit entitlement finally before the factory-premises issue was determined.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh decision after the registration issue is decided.

---