2015 (10) TMI 2072

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s and are having central excise registration. They are also availing CENVAT Credit on inputs and capital goods. During the course of audit, it was observed that during the period from April, 2008 to March, 2010 the appellants availed credit of Rs. 8,02,278/- on items like Shapes, Sections, Angles, Channel, TMT bars and welding electrodes as inputs. This was objected on the ground that these would not come under definition of inputs. Appellants explained that these items were used as inputs for manufacture of capital goods. The appellants availed credit on these items for Rs. 2,56,324/- for further period April, 2010 to July, 2011. A show cause notice was issued raising the above allegations which finalized in the order dated 7.11.2013 which....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y availed, by the appellant. 2. Against this, the learned DR strenuously argued that the credit is inadmissible. He pointed out that in appellants own case for an earlier period (Srinathji Ispat Vs.CCE, Ghaziabad, 2010 (262) ELT 849 (Tri-Del) the Tribunal has denied credit on TMT Bar, Shapes, Sections, Angles and Channels. It is also submitted that though appellants contend that these items were used by them in manufacture of capital goods, the appellants have not been able to establish the manner in which these items were put into use. 3. Heard both sides. It is correct that the Tribunal in the decision cited above has taken the view that credit is not admissible on these items. But during that earlier period, the credit was claimed ....