AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1283
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Excise Tariff Act 1985. For manufacturing of cement appellant requires electricity which is used at various stages of production for conversion of raw material into final products for which the appellant entered into an agreement with M/s. Madhya Pradesh Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company (Vidyut Company) for supply of electricity to appellants manufacturing plant. Appellants also engaged one M/s. Kailash Constructions (Contractor) for undertaking the entire work of erection of dedicated Transmission line from Sitpura Sub-station to appellants manufacturing factory. During the period August 2008, September 2008 and October 2009, the appellant availed Cenvat Credit of main components of transmission line like towers or pylons made up of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ey were permitted to lay dedicated transaction line. It is his submission that the said dedicated transmission line supplies power only to appellant's factory. He would submit that similar issue came up before Tribunal in the case of Birla Corporation Ltd. wherein Tribunal disallowed credit on spares of ropeway used for transporting the crushed limestone from mines on the ground that the same is not material handling equipment within the factory; said decision was upturned by the Hon'ble Apex Court on appeal as reported at 2005 (186) ELT 266 (SC). Following the said decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court the Tribunal, in the case of Sanghi Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE Rajkot 2006 (206) ELT 575 (Tri-Del) allowed credit on galvanized structure used as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ess of manufacture of the final products of the appellant. 7. We find that the adjudicating authority has mis-directed his findings in denying the cenvat credit to the appellant. It is undisputed that the transmission line which is laid is for the exclusive and dedicated use of the appellant. It also cannot be disputed that electricity is the prime / essential requirement in the manufacturing of cement. We find that there is also no dispute as to the fact that the items used for laying down the dedicated transmission line were duty paid and the duty paying documents are in the name of the appellant. 8. On such a factual matrix, we find that the adjudicating authority holding Cenvat Credit is not eligible only on the ground that these ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 were amended in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with effect from 7-7-2009, the date on which it was notified by the Central Government from the date of the notification. According to learned Counsel for the appellant, this amended definition would apply only to the factory or manufacturer and would not apply to the service provider. According to him, either before the amendment made in the year 2009 or thereafter, the appellant was neither factory nor manufacturer and he has only constructed jetty by use of cement and steel for which he was entitled for input credit as jetty was constructed by the contractor, but the jetty is situated within the port area and the ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation of support structures on which various capital goods are placed? The same stands denied by the lower authority. The learned DR has sought disallowance of the same by citing the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (supra) and other judgments. Further, he has brought to our notice and emphasized the amendment carried out in Explanation-II to Rule 2(a) which defines the term "Input" w.e.f. 07.07.2009. It has further been pleaded that the Cenvat Credit claimed for the period prior to this will be covered within the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. (supra). 14. The Larger Bench decision in Vandana Global Ltd.'s case (supra) laid down that even if the iron and articles ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the various capital goods, such as, kiln, material handling conveyor system, furnace etc. cannot be suspended in mid air. They will need to be suitably supported to facilitate smooth functioning of such machines. It is obvious that the structural items have been suitably worked upon for this purpose. Accordingly, the goods fabricated, using such structurals, will have to be considered as parts of the relevant machines. The definition of "Capital Goods" includes, components, spares and accessories of such capital goods. Accordingly, applying the "User Test" to the facts in hand, we have no hesitation in holding that the structural items used in the fabrication of support structures would fall within the ambit of "Capital Goods" as contempla....