2018 (1) TMI 152

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g filed in time, I condone the delay in filing the appeal by the Revenue. 2. By this common order, I propose to dispose of appeal No.E/31077/2017 and E/30252/2017. These two appeals are filed by the Revenue against the common Order-in-Appeal No.VIZ-EXCUS-001 APP-71-72-16-17 dated 29.11.2016. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records. 4. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue is regarding eligibility to avail CENVAT credit on the various items like Pig Moulds, MS Plates, Channels, MS Rounds, TMT Bars, Lancing Pips which are according to the respondent are capital goods are also the CENVAT credit on MS Plates, Channels, TMT Bars etc. which accordingly to appellant are used for fabricating support structures are capital....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....apital goods by restricting the quantum to 50%, the notice proposes denial both under 'inputs' and 'capital goods'. I find that the lower authority in para 12 and para 13 of his findings of the impugned order merely assessed the admissibility under 'capital goods' or "inputs and incorrectly held the impugned goods" inadmissible on a hypothesis that they were deployed in fabricating support structures for capital goods. This is legally untenable since the Apex Court ruling in the Saraswati Sugar Mills case [2011 (270) ELT 465 (SC.)] prescribed a "user lest" to admissibility to credit in respect of spares, parts and accessories of capital goods, without blindly applying the ratio of Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills decis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ea was unaddressed in adjudication. I find that lower authority had examined the notice proposals in terms of the admissibility under inputs and capital goods in isolation, restricting findings the category under which the credit was actually availed. For the period prior 01.04.2011, Rule 2(k) excluded only cement and steel used in civil structures and foundations alone by Explanalion-2. The phrase 'capital goods' appearing under explanation-2 to rule 2(k) requires the entire rule 2(a) to be read into it, since Rule 2 opens with the words "In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires". Thus the eligibility of the impugned to credit prior to under Rule 2(k) is contingent upon the exact deployment of the credit availed goods. To ....