TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 1070
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7, cleared removed these capital goods from the factory without reversal of Cenvat Credit availed. A show cause notice dated 16-04-2010 was issued demanding the Cenvat Credit availed by alleging that the capital goods on which Cenvat Credit was availed, were removed as such, the show cause notice also demanded interest and sought to impose penalty. Appellant contested the show cause notice on merits as well as on limitation. Adjudicating Authority after following due process of law, confirmed the demand with interest and imposed penalty holding that appellant had to reverse the Cenvat Credit since the capital goods were removed as such. On an appeal filed before the first appellate authority, he also aggrieved with the findings of the adjud....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Tribunal will apply in the full force in the case in hand. He would further draw my attention to the judgment of Honble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Raghav Alloys Ltd. 2011 (263) ELT 161 and the judgment of Honble High Court of Madras in the case of Rogini Mills Ltd. 2011 (264) ELT 367 for the preposition that the Expression as such was also include the used as well as unused capital goods. 5. I have considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. 6. On perusal of records, I find that the issue is insmall and narrow compose in as much whether the appellant is required to the reverse Cenvat Credit availed on the capital goods and removed subsequently after use. The show cause ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of the appellant that the said rule provides for reversal for Cenvat Credit only when the capital goods are removed as such without being put to use. 9. I find strong force in the contention raised by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Solectron Centum Electronics (supra). The Hon'ble High Court in the said judgment at Para No. 5, framed the second question of law that arose for their consideration as under: "Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal is correct in holding that the terms "Capital goods as such" occurring in Rule 3(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 refers to only Unused cenvated capital goods?" After framing the said question of law, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng of the expression as such would be that capital goods are removed without putting them to use. Admittedly, in the present case capital goods have been used for a period of more than 7 to 8 years. As such, interpretation given by the authorities below would lead to absurd results if an assessee is required to reverse the credit originally availed by them at the time of receipt of the capital goods, when the said capital goods are subsequently removed as old, damaged and unserviceable capital goods. This would defeat the very purpose of grant of facility of Modvat credit in respect of capital goods and would not be in accordance with the legislative intent." 13. The Delhi High Court in the matter of Harsh International (Khaini) ....