TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (11) TMI 670
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he items used in the factory premises is allowed. (ii) Modvat Credit of Rs. 25,97,350/- in respect of the items of capital goods used in the mines and outside the factory is disallowed. (iii) Modvat Credit of Rs. 4,34,188/- in respect of the items used within the factory which are not eligible as capital goods is disallowed. (iv) No penalty is imposed for the reasons recorded above. The fact of the case is that the appellant M/s. Ultra Tech Cement Limited availed Cenvat Credit on various capital goods and material used in manufacture of capital goods in their factory. By the impugned order, the Cenvat Credit was disallowed on the following items: Sr. No. Item in dispute Amount of Credit (in Rs.) 1. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....OL-70-SC-CX]. He submits that all the above judgments are related to Railway tracks utilized for handling of material in the factory and the credit was allowed, Diesel Locomotive runs on the same railway tracks for handling of the material therefore the use of railway tracks as well as Diesel Locomotive one and the same. Hence when credit is admissible on railway tracks the same should be allowed on the Diesel Locomotive also. (c) As regard claim of Cenvat Credit on Tyre Protection Chain. The said item is used to protect tyre of the wheel loader used in cleaner handling for wear and tear. He submits that on the very same item, this Tribunal has allowed the Cenvat Credit in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex. Chandigarh Vs. A.C.C. Ltd. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....247(Tri-Bang)] (b) Diesel Locomotive (i) India Cements Ltd. Vs. CCE Hyderabad [2004(178) ELT 194(Tri-Bang)]. (c) CTD Bars, Angles, Channels, etc. (i) Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur[2010(253) ELT 440(Tri- LB)] (ii) J.K. Cement Works Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur[2004(178) ELT. 388(Tri-Del)] He submits that in view of the above judgments the appellant is not entitled for the Cenvat Credit for goods in question. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused record. 5. (a) I find that as regard capital goods used in the mines as per the submission of the appellant and ground plan submitted by them it is clear that it is captive mines which is used exclusively for the appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isreading of the process. Such an error has occurred because the Commissioner did not keep in mind the principle of law laid down by this Court in M/s. J. K. Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd.'s case, highlighted above. 19. When we read the order of the CEGAT, we find that CEGAT has not even adverted to and examined the issue from the aforesaid angle, which was the only method for arriving at a finding as to whether the railway tracks installed within the plant would come within the definition of capital goods under Rule 57Q of the Rules or not. The order of the CEGAT is stoically silent. It has affirmed the order of the Commissioner by simply observing that the Commissioner has arrived at the conclusion that these goods ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect of tyre protection chain. (d) As regard the material such as CTF Bars, Angles, Channels, etc., as per the fact of the case as submitted by the Ld. Counsel this materials were used in the erection and construction of RCC Tank(silo). When the said Tank(Silo) is made of cement steel then obviously it is immovable goods unlike other plant machinery such as DG Sets annealing line, pollution control equipment. Once the material is used in the immovable goods, as held by the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global(supra) the material used in the manufacture of such immovable goods shall not be eligible for Cenvat Credit. In the judgment of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd(supra) of the Honble Apex Court and other judgment cited by....