TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 373
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icals. They are also availing the facility of Modvat/Cenvat credit on inputs. The respondents were procuring/generating electric power is from the sources, namely MSEB, Diesel Generating Sets installed in the Rayon Plant by using LSHS and Power Generating were installed in the Rayon Plant by using fuel coal, furnace oil and LSHS. The electricity so procured/generated was utilized in their factory premises i.e. in Rayon Plant and also supplied outside the factory to their residential colony, club, hospital, Century Chemical plant and pump house installed outside the factory. It was observed that the respondent has taken the credit on the fuel used in generation of power which was supplied outside the factory. Therefore they are not entitled ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....their Rayon plant and Chemical plant; (d) In the case of M/s. S.G.K. Industries as reported in 2002 (48) RLT-940-CEGAT, Hon'ble Tribunal held that "I hold that credit of specified duty shall be allowed in respect of capital goods used for generation of electricity used within factory of production of manufacture of final product and not elsewhere; (e) In the case of M/s. Madras Cements Ltd. reported in 1998 (99) E.L.T. 395 (Tribunal held that) "In our view therefore, the process of mining carried out could not be taken to be encompassed as for manufacture of cement". "Since the question of Modvat credit under Rule 57A has to be related to a unit which is manufacturing a particular produc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the above said demand. (c) Whether the CESTAT should pass any such other order as may be deemed fit? The respondents are also filed cross-objection to the appeal on the premises that the demand confirmed against them on account of electricity used in residential colony, club, hospital. Cenvat credit is not tenable same has been confirmed against them by invoking the extended period of limitation as show cause notice was issued on 26-11-2002 and demands pertains to April, 1997 to February, 2002. He further submitted that as demand are not sustainable therefore penalty is also not sustainable. 4. Heard both sides. 5. It is the contention the ld. AR for the Revenue that during the relevant time the respo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner reported in 2001 (129) E.L.T. 73 (Tri.-Del.) which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Civil Appeal Nos. 7471-7472/2001 vide order, dated 14-8-2007 [2007 (216) E.L.T. A23 (S.C.)]. In support of the cross-objections, he further submitted that the electricity consumed in residential colony, club and hospital is also entitled for input credit to the appellant. In the light of the decision of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III reported in 2009 (240) E.L.T. 641 (S.C.) on the ground of limitation as in that case the Hon'ble Apex Court held that penalty is not imposable as it is an issue of interpretation of various Cenvat Rules when penalty is not imposable th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Modvat/Credit. In those facts, this Tribunal held that the number of different plants manufacturing different excisable goods in the same premises would constitute one factory, separate registration would not mean that there are different factories as per the definition of 'factory' under Section 2(e) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The said decision was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court cited (supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under :- "We do not find any merit in this civil appeal filed by the Department. Apart from the reasons given in the impugned judgment by the Tribunal, we find that in the present case, the show cause notice given by the Department itself proceeds on the basis that the factory of the assessee consist....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... department themselves which also constitute that both the units consist of one factory. Therefore, we do not find any reasons to interfere with the impugned order wherein Modvat/Cenvat credit on the inputs used in generation of electricity which was used for pump house and chemical plant are allowed. 9. The respondents have also filed cross-objection to this appeal and on the ground of limitation as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. (supra), we find that in the case of Maruti Suzuki Ltd. (supra) the identical issue of limitation was considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court wherein it was held that inputs used in generation of electricity which in turn was supplied to the residential colony is ....