TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1097
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e parties. 3. The brief facts of these appeals are in the table as follows:- Appeal No. Impugned Order & Date Input Credit in dispute Penalty Period E/145/2012 Order-in-Original No. 29/Commr./Mrt-I/2011 dated 30.09.2011 Rs. 1,23,27,963/- Rs. 1,23,27,963/- in Rule 15 read with Section 11AC Jan'06 to Aug'06 E/146/2012 By Revenue C.O. by Assessee Order-in-Original No. 29/Commr./Mrt-I/2011 dated 30.09.2011 Rs. 5,22,94,240/- - -do- E/1800/2012 Order-in-Original No. 22/Commr./Mrt-I/2012 dated 30.03.2012 Rs. 60,53,387/- Cenvat Credit disallowed Rs. 60,53,387/- in Rule 15 read with Section 11AC Oct'06 to Mar'10 4. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that the issue is no longer res-integra in view of several rulings of Hon'ble High Courts and this Tribunal, he places reliance on final order of this Tribunal being Final Order No. 57918/2013 dated25.9.2013 in Appellants own case (another unit) in - Excise Appeal No. 793/2011 (SM) wherein, it is held as follows - "The appellant are a sugar mill engaged in manufacture of sugar and molasses chargeable to Central Excise duty. The dispute is in respect of Cenvat credit in respect of MS Angles, Channels, Plates ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case of Ambuja Cements Eastern Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur reported in 2010 (256) E.L.T. 690 (Chhattisgarh) and judgment of Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCE, Bangalore I vs. Alfred Herbert (India) Ltd. reported in 2010 (257) E.L.T. 29 (Kar.), wherein it has been held inputs used for repair and maintenance of the plant and machinery are eligible for Cenvat credit, that as regards the steel items namely MS Steel, MS Plates and MS Angles, the same have either been used for fabrication of various items of sugar mill machinery or for repair and maintenance of sugar mill machinery, as has been observed by the Assistant Commissioner in his order-in-original as well as in the show cause notice. That Commissioner (Appeals) has in his order wrongly mentioned that part of the steel items were used in erection of supporting structures for machinery, as there is no such allegation in the show cause notice nor any observation in the order-in-original passed by the Assistant Commissioner, that the steel items have been used either in repair and maintenance or for fabrication of the various items of sugar mill machinery, and therefore, the same would be eligible for Cenvat credit as input, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not be commercially feasible even though theoretically it may be possible to carry out manufacturing activity without repair of plant and machinery. Apex Court in the case of J.K. Cotton Spg. & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. vs. Sales Tax Officer, Kanpur reported in 1997 (91) E.L.T. 34 (S.C.), while interpreting the scope of the expression "used in the manufacture of" in Section 8 (3) (b) of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 has held that if a process or activity is so integrally related to the ultimate manufacture of goods so that without that process or activity, the manufacture may, even if theoretically possible, be commercially inexpedient, the goods intended in that process or activity would have to be treated as used in the manufacture. When the Apex Court has interpreted the expression used in the manufacture in the above manner, the scope of the expression used in or in relation to manufacture, whether directly or indirectly in the definition of input in Rule 2 (k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 would be much wider. Moreover, Honble Calcutta High Court in the case of Singh Alloys & Steel Ltd. vs. Assistant Collector of Central Excise reported in 1993 (66) E.L.T. 594 (Cal.) has held th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t in Mundra Port & Special Economic Zone Ltd. Vs. CCE [2015-TIOL-1288-HC-AMD-ST] have held vide order dated 29.4.2015 overruling Larger Bench decision of this Tribunal in Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. CCE Raipur reported in 2010 (253) E.L.T. 440 (Tri. LB) held that the Explanation -2 in Rule 2(k) of CCR, 2004, inserted w.e.f. 07.7.2009, have only prospective effect, observing that there is nothing in the Amending Act to suggest that the amendment made was clarificatory in nature. The Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in CCE V/s Sai Samhita Storages (P) Ltd. reported in MANU/AP/0510/2011 have held that the assessee engaged in business of providing storage and warehousing services, is entitled to take Cenvat credit on inputs like Cement, Iron Bars, Pipes etc. used in construction of warehouse, without which the assessee could not have provided the taxable service of storage & warehousing. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in India Cements Ltd. Vs. Cestat (2015) have been relied and quoted - "8 As far as the reliance placed on the decision reported in MANU/SC/0895/2011: 2011-TIOL-73-SC-CX (Saraswati Sugar Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - III) in Civil Appeal No. 5295 of 2003 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ered by the Tribunal that the machineries were complete and having regard to the meaning of the expression "components/parts", with reference to the particular industry in question, the Apex Court rejected the appeal filed by the asessee. 11. Thus going by the factual findings, which are distinguishable from the facts found by the Authorities below in the case on hand, we have no hesitation in rejecting the Revenue's appeal, thereby confirming the order of the Tribunal. 12. Learned standing counsel appearing for the revenue pointed out that the tribunal had merely passed a cryptic order by referring to the earlier decisions. We do not think that this would in any manner prejudice the case of the Revenue, given the fact that on the identical set of facts, the assessee's own case was considered by this Court and by following the decision reported in (Commissioner of Central Excise Jaipur Vs. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd.), the Revenue's appeal was also rejected. In the circumstances, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, C.M.P. No. 16107 of 2005 is also dismissed." 13. From a perusal of the above said judgment, it is seen that there is ....