TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 316
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dit or not. The Tribunal after hearing this matter on 23/3/12 vide final order No. 482/2012-EX had partly allowed the appeal. Para 10 of the order is reproduced below :- 10. In view of the above discussion (a) the portion of the impugned order disallowing Modvat credit in respect of MS Angles, Channels, Sections, Bars, etc. used for supporting structures for machinery for the period prior to 16/03/1995, is set aside and the portion of the order disallowing the Modvat credit in respect of these items for the period w.e.f. 16/3/1995 is upheld ; (b) Out of Modvat credit demand of Rs. 1,02,237/- and Rs. 42,605/-, the demand of Rs. 41,775/- and Rs. 38,815/- respectively is upheld. The appeal is, therefore, partly allowed with consequential r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d dies, generating sets and weight bridge used in the factory of manufacturers, that by amending Notification No. 11/1995-CE (NT) dated 16/3/95, without disturbing the above definition of capital goods, only some more items were added to the definition of capital goods by adding clause (d) & (e) in the definition of capital goods, that it is only by amending Notification No. 14/1996-CE (NT) dated 23/7/96, that the entire definition of capital goods in explanation to Rule 57Q was changed and was replaced by a new definition which contained specific headings and, as such, the new definition came into force w.e.f. 23/7/96, that while the old definition of capital goods during period prior to 23/7/96 covered 'plant' also, the new definition in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, learned DR, accepted that the period of dispute in this case is from November 1994 to August 1995 and during that period the definition of 'capital goods', as given in Rule 57Q covered 'plant' and accordingly the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Jawahar Mills Ltd. vs. CCE, Coimbatore (supra) would be applicable. She also accepted that explanation to Rule 57Q (1) had been replaced by a new explanation mentioning a specific heading only by Notification No. 14/1996-CE (NT) dated 23/7/96. 5. We have considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 6. There is no dispute that the period of dispute in this case is from November 1994 to August 1995. During this period, the definition of the term capital goods as gi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....applicable and since that definition covered the word 'plant', in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Jawahar Mills Ltd. vs. CCE, Coimbatore (supra) and Scientific Engineering House Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), the MS Angles, Channels, Sections etc. used for supporting structures of the machinery would be eligible for Cenvat credit and, as such, the judgment of Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur reported in 2010 TIOL 624 CESTAT (Del. -LB) would not be applicable. 7. In view of the above discussion, the ROM is allowed and in the final order dated 23/3/12 para 7, 8, 9 and 10 are to be read under:- 7. As regards the main point of dispute regarding the sustainability or otherwise of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....expression - machines, machinery, plant, equipment Subsequently these judgments were overruled by Larger Bench judgment of the Tribunal in case of Vandana Global Ltd. v. CCE, Raipur reported in 2010 -TIOL-624-CESTAT Del. LB = 2010 (253) E.L.T. 440 (Tri. - LB) wherein it was held that MS Angles, channels, bars, plates etc. used for erecting supporting structures are not eligible for Cenvat credit either as inputs or as capital goods, as these items are neither covered by the definition of capital goods nor the same can be treated as input used for the manufacture of capital goods, as the supporting structure are capital assets fixed to the earth, not capital goods. But during period prior to 23/7/1996, to which this case pertains, the positi....