TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 1089
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther the appellant, who is a manufacturer of bulk drugs, is entitled to cenvat credit on MS items such as plates, angles, channels and sheets falling under chapter heading: 72, 73 and 74 as inputs. Initially, the appellant had taken cenvat credit on these items as capital goods which was questioned by the department and in response to the appellant admitted that they do not qualify as capital goods because they were materials which were used for repair and maintenance of their machinery. However, he claimed that all these materials were used within the factory after 01.04.2011 when the definition of inputs under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 has been modified under Rule 2(k) including "all goods used in the factory by the manufacturer of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich have no relationship whatsoever with the manufacture of a final product. They, therefore, claimed that they are entitled to cenvat credit on these items as inputs. Not agreeing with the contention of the appellant, four show cause notices were issued to them seeking to deny cenvat credit on these items as inputs and proposing to recover the irregularly availed cenvat credit under Rule 14 of CCR, 2004 read with Section 11A of the Central Excise Act along with interest. It was also proposed to impose penalties under Rule 15 of the CCR, 2004. 4. After following due process, the lower authority confirmed the demands and the assessee's appeal before the First Appellate Authority was rejected in respect of all four show cause notices. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d against the Revenue regarding entitlement of cenvat credit on angles, beems, channels during the period April 2015 to September 2015 under CCR, 2004 as inputs. However, the Hon'ble High Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal for the limited purpose of finding out whether these materials were used for maintenance and repair of machinery or for other purposes. He would submit that in their case there is no doubt whatsoever that all the materials in question were used for maintenance and repair of their machinery as has been correctly recorded by the lower authority in the impugned order. He further relies on the case laws in the following cases: (i) Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., [2016 (338) ELT 308 (Tri-Hyd)} (i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al products. Therefore, the impugned order is unsustainable and needs to be set aside. Learned DR reiterates the findings of the lower authority. 6. I have considered the arguments on both sides and perused the records. The definition of inputs under Rule 2(k) of CCR, 2004 has been amended with effect from 01.04.2011 to include all materials of goods used in the factory of the manufacture of the final products. It is not in dispute that the goods in question were used in the factory of manufacture by the manufacturer. The only question which remains is only whether they get excluded by the exclusion part of the definition as materials which have no relationship whatsoever to the manufactured final products. It is not in dispute that the ....