2016 (6) TMI 274

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-in-Original No. 09/VMJ-09/2007/Thane-I and No. 150/06-07 dated 27/12/2007 and 30/3/2007 respectively. 2. The issue involved in these appeals are whether the appellant are entitle for Cenvat credit in respect material like cement, angles, channels, electrodes, CTD Bars and H.R. Plates. Ld. Lower authorities denied the Cenvat credit on the ground that all these materials are for general purpose, structural items used for carrying out civil engineering work and therefore could not be treated as accessories of machines installed in the factory. It was also contended that longer period is invokable as the appellant has suppressed the fact of availing Cenvat credit on these ineligible items. 3. Shri. Vinod Awtani, C.A. appearing on behalf ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cise Vs. M/s. Ispat Industries Ltd[Appeal No. 187 of 2006 dated 19/7/2007 passed by Honble Bombay High Court] (c) M/s. Thiru Arooran Sugars Vs. Custom, Excise and Service tax Appellate Tribunal [2015-TIOL-1734-HC-MAD-CX] (e) Mundra Ports and Special Economic Zone Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs[2015-TIOL-1288-HC-AHM-ST] (f) ACC Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur [2009(237) ELT 573(Tri. Mumbai)] (g) G.M.R. Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. Visakhapatnam-I[2009(241) ELT 388(Tri. Bang.)] He also submits that the issue of Cenvat credit on these items is debatable right from beginning and various conflicting judgments were passed therefore issue was referred to the L....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xcise, A.P.[2008(9) S.T.R. 314(S.C.)] 4. Shri. H.M. Dixit, Ld. Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He submits that all the subject goods are in the nature of either civil construction material or supporting structural steel. He submits that in the Larger Bench judgment of Vandana Global Ltd(supra) Tribunal has held that steel items used for supporting structural are neither input nor capital goods, he further relied upon the judgment in case of Upper Ganges Sugar & Industries Ltd Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. Meerut-II[2013(293) ELT 186(All.)] 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the record. 6. I find that items such as channe....