2016 (12) TMI 1468

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant has not produced documentary evidence to avail cenvat credit of input services as per Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit 2004. 2. The Ld. Consultant for the appellant submits that it is not disputed that appellant has not received cable and same has been used in providing output service. The Revenue has contended that as cable cannot be a capital goods as per Rule 2A of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 as same is falling under CH 39 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. It is his submission that if the cable does not fall as capital goods under Rule 2A of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 the same may be treated as input under Rule 2K of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 and the Cenvat Credit is to be allowed as held by this Tribunal in the case of CCE Jaipur ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in providing output service. Therefore, appellant is entitled to avail cenvat credit on these cables either as capital goods or input as per cenvat credit rules 2004. Same has been observed by this Tribunal in the case of J K Synthetics ltd. (Supra) wherein this Tribunal has observed as under: "Whether the benefit is allowable in terms of rule 57A or 57Q is secondary. If the item is treated as capital goods, it has to be allowed under Rule 57Q and if not it has to be allowed under Rule 57A but it would not be excluded from the purview of Modvat scheme till essential requirements of the scheme were duly satisfied. The Ld. Counsel has in the above circumstances justifiably pleaded that while they have asked for the benefit in terms of Rule ....