Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether GP coils, GP sheets and aluminium sections used for making air ducts for a humidifier machine qualified for Cenvat credit either as capital goods, components or accessories of capital goods, or as inputs, and whether the amendment to the relevant input definition affected the assessee's claim.
Analysis: The humidifier machine was accepted as falling under Chapter 84 and eligible as capital goods. The dispute was confined to the materials used for fabricating ducts attached to that machine. Applying the user test, the materials used to fabricate an integral duct system necessary for the functioning of the humidifier machine were held to be part of the capital goods as components or accessories under Rule 2(a)(A)(iii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The materials were also treated as inputs under Rule 2(k), since goods used in the manufacture of capital goods which are further used in the factory were covered by the unamended provision. The amendment introducing exclusions for items used in construction of structures or support was held inapplicable to the period in dispute and not shown to be retrospective or merely clarificatory.
Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to Cenvat credit on the disputed materials, and the denial of credit, interest and penalty was unsustainable.