2018 (6) TMI 733

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ber (Technical) Shri S.Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Appellant Ms. Cynduja Crishnan, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench Brief facts are that the appellants are manufacturers of sugar and molasses and are availing the facility of CENVAT credit on capital goods / inputs in the factory. On verification of accounts, it was noticed that the appellant had availed credit on MS joi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the credit against which the department is now before the Tribunal. 2. On behalf of Revenue, ld. AR Shri S. Govindarajan supported the grounds of appeal. In addition, he relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - 2016 (42) STR 249 (Tri.- LB) and submit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ational platform without which the manufacturing activity cannot be carried out. The said issue was considered by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Vs. CESTAT, Chennai - 2017 (355) ELT 373 (Mad.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held the issue in favour of the assessee. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The issue is whether the MS angles, MS channels, HR coils etc. us....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d upon Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The decision rendered in Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. was with regard to inputs used for providing output services. In the present case, the respondent is engaged in manufacturer of final products and there is very close nexus with the inputs (MS channels etc.) as they were used for fabrication of support structures for the reason that without such supp....