2018 (7) TMI 606

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Act, 1985. On the basis of some information, the Preventive Branch of the Department noticed that the appellant has purchased various capital goods and has taken 100% Cenvat Credit thereof. In addition, it was also noticed that the appellant has also availed Cenvat Credit of M.S. square bars falling under Chapter 72 which otherwise is not a capital goods. After the admission from the General Manager of the appellant about availing the said Cenvat Credit on the capital goods and the input services however, in advertently, that the same has been reversed but the show cause notice dated 4th April, 2014 was issued calling upon the appellant as to why the credit availed shall not be recovered and the amount already reversed may not be appropriat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the availed credit has not been utilized by the appellant from January to March, 2010-11. It is submitted that in the given circumstances, the Department is absolutely unjustified demanding the recovery of entire availment of Cenvat Credit. At the most the interest for the said three months (January- March, 2010-11) can be demanded. 5.2. With respect to the later issue of MS bars it is submitted that the bars are used by the appellant in making the path way meant to be used for the material handling equipment at the appellants premises i.e. the cranes. The said cranes are very much in the definition of capital goods being falling under Chapter 84 of the Tariff Act and since without the path way for which the M.S. Bars have been used,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng that even the availment of Cenvat Credit and / or utilization thereof which has been wrongly availed also invites the penalty of the same being refunded alongwith the interest thereof. It is in view of the said Rule that the impugned show cause notice was issued. Hence, the credit availed there upon by the appellant is wrong and unjustified and has rightly been demanded by the Adjudicating Authority. Impressing upon the correctness of the orders, ld. DR has prayed for the rejection of the appeal. 7. After hearing both the ld. Counsels and perusing the record, I am of the opinion that the admitted fact for the present case is that the appellant has availed 100% of the Cenvat Credit in the year of receipt of capital goods itself, instea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....three months. 8. Now coming to the issue of availing the Cenvat Credit on the MS bars, the definition of capital goods is relevant for the purpose to check as to whether the MS Bars used in the given circumstances can be categorized as the capital goods, no doubt as per Rule 2 (a) (i) Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, the MS Bars do not fall within the definition of capital goods being the Article of Chapter 72. Coming to the aspect as to whether it can be categorized as components or accessory for any of the Article falling under Chapter 82, 84 & 85 and 90 as mentioned in the Rule 2 (a)(iii)CCR. Though the ld. Counsel for appellant has impressed upon that since the cranes for whose pathway the impugned MS bars have been utilized fall under Cha....