2017 (10) TMI 270

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ures for support of the Capital goods installed within the factory premises. Alleging that these items are not eligible to credit, Show Cause Notice was issued to them for recovery of credit of Rs. 72,290/-for the period 2011-12 and 2012-13. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed alongwith interest and equal amount of penalty was imposed on them. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order. Hence, the present appeal. 3. The Ld. Advocate submits that in principle the credit is admissible on the said items, being used as structures in holding various capital goods and hence components, accessories of the capital goods in view of the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. C.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ered 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 made w.e.f. 7-7-2009 as a clarification amendment and hence to be considered retrospectively. However, we find that the said decision of the Larger Bench was considered by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mundra Ports & Special Economic Zone Ltd., 2015 (04) LCX0197 - 2015 (39) S.T.R. 726 (Guj.), wherein it was observed that the amendment made on 7-7-2009 cannot be held to be clarificatory and as such would be applicable onl....