TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 1288
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....EXM001 and are engaged in the manufacture of sponge iron falling under Chapter 72 of CETA, 1985. The appellants are availing the benefit of cenvat credit of duty paid on input/input services and capital goods. It was noticed during the course of audit that the appellants have availed cenvat credit on MS Angles, MS Bars, Channels, etc. during the period from 03/2008 to 06/2009 and these items were used to build structural items for equipments like bunkers, conveyors, Kiln etc. treating them as capital goods. It appeared that the credit availed on the said items is irregular inasmuch as these items are neither inputs nor capital goods. Since the appellants did not reverse the irregular credit, show cause notice was issued proposing to deny th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant has failed to establish the user test in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Jawahar Mills Ltd. reported in 2001 (132) E.L.T. 3 (S.C) which was not the allegation raised in the show-cause notice. He further submitted that the impugned order as well as the adjudication order travelled beyond the allegation in the show-cause notice and hence cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. For this submission, he relied upon the following decisions: a. Metrochem Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE, Vadodara-I - 2013 (292) E.L.T. 578 (Tri.-Ahmd.) b. Global Energy Food Industries Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad - 2014 (300) E.L.T. 298 (Tri. -Ahmd.) c. Unioson Metal Ltd. Vs. CCE, Ahmedabad - 2010 (253) E.L.T. 618 (Tri. -Ahmd.) d. HPCL ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; Monnet Ispat & Energy Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur - 2015 (330) E.L.T 711 (Tri. -Del.) e. India Cements Ltd. Vs. CESTAT- 2015 (321) E.L.T. 209 (Mad.) f. Commissioner Vs. India Cements Ltd. - 2014 (305) E.L.T. 558 (Mad.) 3.3. He also submitted that the demand for the period prior to 2009 is barred by limitation as the issue is relating to the interpretation of the definition of 'capital goods' and also in view of the subsequent decisions settling the issue in favour of the assessee. 4. On the other hand the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record and the various decisions relied upon by the appellant, I ....