2017 (8) TMI 543

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Department and set aside the Order-in-Original. Since the issue involved in both the appeals is identical, therefore, both the appeals are being disposed of by the present common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts of the Appeal No. E/1410/2012 are taken. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods i.e. TMT Bars, Rounds, Squares and Steel Ingots falling under the Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 and were availing cenvat credit of duty paid on capital goods and service tax paid on GTA service under the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. It was noticed that the appellant had availed cenvat credit of duty paid on HR Plates, MS Beams, MS Channels, HR Cut ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant submitted that the impugned orders are not sustainable in law as the same has been passed by misconstruing the definition of 'capital goods'. He further submitted that the impugned orders are contrary to the binding judicial precedent on the same issue. He further submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to consider the Chartered Engineer certificate who has certified that the steel items which are in dispute are used for fabrication of Re-heating Furnace, Gantry and Columns. He further submitted that the Gantries and Columns are the components of the EOT Cranes which are classified under Chapter Heading 84261100 and are covered under the definition of 'capital goods' under Rule 2(a)(A)(iii) of Cenvat Credi....