2016 (6) TMI 1143

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nputs. During the month of April, 2010 the appellants availed CENVAT credit of duty amounting to Rs. 38,231/-, being the balance 50% of the capital goods credit relating to the period 01-04-2009 to 06-07-2009, on structural items/TOR steel items like MS Angles, channels, plates, sheets, Rebar coils etc. A show cause notice dated 19-04-2011 was issued proposing to disallow credit on said items which do not fall under the definition of capital goods. After adjudication, the adjudicating authority confirmed Rs. 38,231/- being the credit wrongly availed on steel items used for structurals during the period  01-04-2009 to 06-07-2009, along with interest and imposed penalty of equal amount. The appellants carried the issue in appeal before t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... pleaded that the appeal may be allowed. 4. Refuting the above contentions, the learned AR Shri A.K.Nirala, submitted that the Larger Bench of Cestat in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. CCE, Raipur 2010-TIOL-624 Cestat-Del-LB has held that cement and steel items used for laying foundations and for building support structures cannot be treated as either inputs or capital goods in relation to the final product and therefore, no cerdit is admissible. That it was also held therein that Explanation 2 to Rule 2(k) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 though introduced on 07-07-2009 has retrospective effect. Therefore, though the period in the present case is 01-04-2009 to 06-07-2009, the credit is not admissible. 5. I have heard the rival submissi....