2016 (10) TMI 649

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, etc. The appellant is procuring the milk, a predominant raw material for manufacture of health products from the villages nearby its factory. In order to facilitate the purchase of milk, the appellant has taken the premises on lease in neighbouring villages for setting up milk collection Centers. The appellant has installed bulk milk coolers (BMC) and DG sets in the milk collection centers as it is essential to store the milk collected at a specific temperature. The appellant availed credit on these BMC and DG sets. The show cause notice was issued to the appellant to deny the credit on the said BMC and DG sets on the ground that the capital goods have not been used in the factory of the appellant. Both the authorities below denied the c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he decision of the Tribunal in the case of Steel Authority of India-2007 (219) ELT 960 (Tri.-Del.). She further submits that the interest is not payable by the appellant in view of the decision of Bill Forge Pvt.Ltdo-2012 (26) STR 204 (Kar.), the credit was not utilized. Therefore, she pray that the penalty is not imposable on the appellant. 5. On the other hand, learned AR opposed the contention of the learned Counsel and submits that the BMC installed at the milk collection centers in various villages around the factory. Some of these milk collection centers are as far as 30 kilometer from the factory. To avail the credit two conditions are required to be satisfied : (a) the goods must fall within the definition of capital goods and (b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ases (supra), I have seen that South Eastern Coalfields and Vikash Industrial Gases (prior) are prior to the decision of the Apex court in the case of Virkram Cement. In the case of Bharat Oman refinery, this Tribunal has not considered the decision of Vikram Cement and South Eastern Coalfields further JSW (supra). I have seen in the case of Vikram Cement, the Apex Court observed as under: 5. As regards the Modvat/Cenvat credit on capital goods, if the mines are captive mines so that they constitute one integrated unit together with the concerned cement factory, Modvat/Cenvat credit on capital goods will be available to the assessee. On the other hand, if the mines are not captive mines but they supply to various other cement companies of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....power plant of Hindalco. 7. However, since, admittedly, some quantity of electricity generated is used in the township and is not used in the factory of the appellant company for manufacture of excisable goods, to that extent, the input duty credit would not be admissible in view of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of CCE v. Solaris Chemtech Ltd. [2007 (214) E.L.T. 481 (S.C.)]. However, for determining the quantum of input duty credit, which would be inadmissible on this ground, the matter would have to be remanded to the original Adjudicating Authority. 10. Further in the case of Birla Corporation Ltd. (supra), wherein the facts of the case are : 2. The Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short &#....