Tribunal Overturns Order, Sends Case Back for Review on Cenvat Credit for Cement and TMT Bars Used Before July 2009.

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the Adjudicating Authority for further assessment regarding the appellant's entitlement to cenvat credit on cement and TMT bars used in foundation work and building construction prior to July 2009. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument against the application of the extended period of limitation, as the cenvat credit was disclosed in their returns. The case requires a detailed bifurcation of materials used before a final decision can be made, with all issues open for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment addresses the issue of whether the appellant is entitled to cenvat credit on cement and TMT bars used in foundation work and building construction prior to July 2009, and whether the extended period of limitation can be invoked.

Analysis:
The appellant's counsel argued that since the cenvat credit was availed before the amendment in Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on 07.07.2009, the credit should be admissible. They cited various judgments in support of their argument. However, the Revenue contended that the goods were used in construction, which was not allowed under the Cenvat Credit Rules. The Tribunal found that while judgments supported cenvat credit for making foundation for machinery erection, there was no clear bifurcation of materials used for foundation and building construction. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for further assessment.

Extended Period of Limitation:
The appellant argued that the extended period of limitation should not apply as they had disclosed the cenvat credit in their returns, indicating no suppression of facts. They relied on relevant judgments to support their position. The Tribunal found merit in this argument and set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal for remand to the Adjudicating Authority.

Conclusion:
The judgment concluded by setting aside the impugned order and remanding the case to the Adjudicating Authority for a detailed assessment of the cenvat credit for goods used in foundation and building construction. The Tribunal emphasized the need for proper bifurcation before making a final decision based on the cited judgments. All issues were kept open for further consideration.

---