2017 (8) TMI 261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....goods in their factory premises. Alleging that these items do not fall under the definition of capital goods, SCN was issued on 25.06.2012 for recovery of credit of Rs. 12,735/- for the period from 2008-2009 to 2009-2010. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed alongwith interest and equal amount of penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who inturn, rejected their appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 3. Ld. Advocate for the appellant submits that on these items used for the fabrication of capital goods, hence, eligible to credit as per the definition of capital goods/input prescribed under Rule 2(a)/2(k) of CCR, 2004. He submits that the credit is admissible for fabricat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 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. 7-7-2009. 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 were used as supporting structures, they would not be eligible for the credit. Considering the amendment mad....