TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 788
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeals) has rejected the appeals of the appellant by holding that the appellant is not eligible to take CENVAT credit on loco and loco parts and in one of the appeals even penalty has been imposed on the General Manager for taking irregular credit. Since in all the four appeals, issue is identical, all the four appeals are disposed of by this common order. 2. For the sake of convenience, the facts of the main appeal No.3316/2012 are taken. 3. The appellants are holders of Central Excise registration and are engaged in the manufacture of cement and clinker. Department observed that the appellant had availed CENVAT credit on 700 HP Diesel Loco and on Loco spares falling under taiff heading 86021000 and 86070000 of the Central Excise Tariff ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther submitted that the locomotive was used for the movement of the railway wagon after loading of the cement and clinker from the packing plant and loading point and also handling raw materials such as coal, clinker, gypsum etc. The movement of the wagon by the locomotive was essentially required. He further submitted that in the show-cause notice, there is no allegation with regard to fraud, collusion or misdeclaration with intent to evade payment of duty. He further submitted that the appellate authority has mainly relied upon the decision in the case of Madras Cement and Hindustan Zinc wherein it is not specifically held that the credit of locomotives is not eligible as an accessory of the capital goods. In support of his submission, he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reof are entitled to CENVAT credit, being the accessory to the capital goods involved in the manufacturing of the final product. 7. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of materials on record and various judgments relied upon by the appellant, I find that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the appellant by the judgments of the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bhusan Steel Ltd. cited supra. Further I also find that in the case of Aditya Cement the Division Bench of the Delhi Tribunal after considering various decisions has held in para 6 as under:- 6. The subject goods (s), assessee manufacturer is using for carrying raw materials like limestone etc. from the mining area to the site of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 9. In the case of Tata Steels Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal held that coke transfer car is used as material handling equipment and without that coke could not be transferred from oven to furnace, accordingly, eligible for credit. The Tribunal relied on Larger Bench decision in the case of Banco Products (India) Ltd. [2009 (235) ELT 636 (Tribunal-LB) = 2009-TIOL-421-CESTAT-AHM-LB. The Larger Bench of this Tribunal held that machines used for delivery of raw material in time or increasing the effective working of the same and even removal of finished goods contribute to manufacture of finished goods." 6.2 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Vs. Malabar Cements Ltd.- 2003 (153) ELT A-94 (SC) did not admit the Revenue's ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rts of the machine become eligible for availing Modvat credit of duties paid thereon. In view thereof the appellants must be held entitled to avail Modvat credit of duties paid on 5% of the total value of iron and steel purchased by manufacturer used as components and parts of the machines. It is not in dispute and no claim is laid to other 95% of the steel and iron. 20. So far as the claim to Railway Track material is concerned, it is common ground that the same has been used for transporting of coal and product of cement. Apparently, though the coal is not end product of the appellant but used as essential adjunct of plant for feeding it with fuel, the essential element of production process for manufacture of cement. Without supply of ....