2015 (10) TMI 1689

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant argued that the issue involved in the present appeal is admissibility of CENVAT Credit on certain items like S.S. Sheets, Plates, Joists, Channels, Coils, M.S. Angles, H.R. Coils, M.S. Plates, Flanges etc, used in the fabrication of storage tank and support structures of the storage tanks. It was his case that majority of the items are used in the fabrication of storage tank from the above mentioned raw materials and became admissible as inputs as per the definition given under Rule 2(k) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. He also relied upon the case law of CCE Visakhapatnam-II Vs A.P.P. Mills Ltd [2013 (29) ELT 585 (Tri-Bang)]. It was his case that as per Para 4.2 of this case law, CESTAT Bangalore has distinguished the judgment of V....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-58311/2013-CU(DB), dt.15.10.2013] to argue that the extended period will be applicable in this case as the applicability of extended period has to be seen with respect to the facts of each case. 3. Heard both the sides and perused the case records. In the present appeal, the Appellant availed CENVAT Credit of Rs. 15,48,118.00 on the items like S.S. Sheets, Plates, Joists, Channels, Coils, M.S. Angles, H.R. Coils, M.S. Plates, Flanges etc as capital goods. These items were used in the manufacture of storage tank and its support structures. The issue of admissibility of these items to CENVAT Credit was under dispute and different opinions on the admissibility of CENVAT Credit on such items were available on the issue. The issue was finally ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....irst appellate authority. The issue on admissibility of such items was finally decided by the Larger Bench in the case of M/s. Vandana Global Limited Vs. CCE, Raipur (supra). In the realm of conflicting interpretations given by various benches of CESTAT and other courts, it cannot be held that there was any suppression / misstatement on the part of the appellant with intention to evade any duty. In the facts and circumstances of the present appeal, extended period cannot be invoked. Without going into the merits of the case, the appeal of the appellant is required to be allowed on time bar alone as demand show cause notice had been issued beyond the period of one year from the date of taking Cenvat Credit." 4. In view of the above observat....