TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (10) TMI 53
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., they took Cenvat credit of Rs. 1,62,576/- in respect of PP Bags, Welding Electrodes and Steel items namely MS Angles, Channels, Plates etc. The Department was of the view that these items are not eligible for Cenvat credit. Accordingly the Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner vide order-in-original dated 14/1/12 disallowed the Cenvat credit in respect of the above items and confirmed the Cenvat credit demand. On appeal being filed to Commissioner (Appeals) against this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 18/10/12 upheld the Cenvat credit demand except for setting aside of the penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. Against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal has been filed. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Ms. Me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missions, the impugned order is not correct. 4. Shri M.S. Negi, the learned DR, pleaded that during the period of dispute, Rule 2 (k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules has been amended so as to exclude from the purview of the term 'input', the steel items used for laying foundation for the machinery or for fabrication of supporting structures for the machinery, that in this case though the appellant plead that they had used the steel items for repair and maintenance of plant and machinery or for fabrication of the components of the machinery for replacing, old and worn out parts since no evidence in support of this claim has been produced and it has to be presumed that the steel items have been used as supporting structures of the machinery....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... steel has been used for fabrication of the components of the machinery for replacing the worn out parts. However, the Departments contention is that the appellant have not produced any evidence in support of their contention regarding the use of these items and, therefore, it has to be presumed that these steel items has been used as supporting structures for machinery or for foundation of the machinery. Though the Department alleges that the use of the steel items was for this purpose only, that is, either for foundation of machinery or for supporting structures, there is no evidence in this regard and this is only a presumption, while the appellant in support of their contention regarding use of steel items have produced a chartered eng....