TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 294
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cise Rules, 2002 which was granted to it on 08.11.2006. Subsequently, the appellant vide letter dated 25.11.2006 submitted the revised ground plan by including the area under crude tank and Single Buoy Mooring (SBM) and pipeline connecting the refinery to the tank farm and the SBM. The appellant has applied for registration of the refinery by including the extended area i.e. pipeline corridor area connecting crude oil tanks and refinery area and the area from crude oil tank to Single buoying Area (SBM) in the sea. 2.1 The revenue asked the appellant to furnished documents, evidences, ownership of land /area through which the pipeline passed vide letter dated 25.11.2006. The appellant had, vide letter dated 18.01.2007, submitted the following:- (i) Order issued by the chief Conservator of Forest Wild Life permitting the Appellant to lay pipeline and construct a jetty in the marine sanctuary and national park, Jamnagar. The said order grants the Appellant the right of way for laying pipelines and construction of jetty and (ii) Copies of sanad and kabulat signed by the competent authority for the adjoining villages in respect of pipeline corridor area approach road connecting cru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was held that the equipments used in the captive mines of the factory would be entitled to Cenvat credit. In the case of Birla corporation Hon'ble Apex Court held that the appellant was entitled to Modvat/Cenvat on capital goods namely spares of ropeway, that are used for conveying fresh Lime stones from crusher (located in/ near the captive mines) to the factory where cement is manufactured. 2.7 The learned counsel further argued that the extended period of limitation has been invoked. He argued that the entire area in which the pipeline was laid was within knowledge of revenue in as much as the appellant's were trying to get the entire area covered by the registration. He also pointed out that verification of documents on which credit was taken was done by the superintendent. He relied on the earlier decision of tribunal in the instant case wherein tribunal had remanded the matter for re-examination on the issue of limitation. Furthermore learned counsel argued that the dispute is a matter of interpretation especially since Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd has settled it in their favour. 3. Learned Authorized Representative argued that there is the fu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s while disposing the Application for registration in any manner, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the Appellant/Assessee. The Appeal is disposed of as above." The matter has not yet been decided by the jurisdictional officer and therefore it cannot be said the dispute raise before us really exist or not. Unless the decision is taken on the application of the appellant's with respect to their registration and inclusion of the areas covering SBM as well as pipeline it cannot be said if the appellant's are using the pipelines within the factory of production or outside the factory of production. 4.2 The appellant's have relied on the decision of Hon'ble High court of Bombay in the case of Reliance Industries Limited (Supra). In the said decision Hon'ble High court observed as follows:- "21. SPM system is of no use, if not connected to the other equipment, machineries for bringing in the raw material as done in the present case. SPM is integrated and integral part though situated outside the factory, but useful and helpful to produce final products. SPM where liquid cargo is discharged from a tanker is an extension of a factory for the purposes of 'capital goods"....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....their chassis [but including dumpers and tippers] Used- 1. in the factory of the manufacturer of the final products, or [1A) outside the factory of the manufacturer of the final products for generation of electricity[ or for pumping of water] for captive use within the factory; or] 2.--------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------------------- ------------------------------ 4.4 Learned Authorized representative has argued that in Rule 57Q there was no necessity of used of capital goods in the factory of the manufacture of final product. 4.5 Learned Counsel has relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Cement Limited (Supra). In the said decision Hon'ble Apex Court observed as follows:- "3. As regards the Modvat/Cenvat credit on capital, goods, if the mines are captive mines so that they constitute one integrated unit together with the concerned cement factory, Modvat/Cenvat credit on capital goods will be available to the assessee. On the other hand, if the mines are not captive mines but they supply to various other cement companies of different assesses, and it is found that the said goods were being used in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly. All appeals and special leave petitions will now be listed for being disposed of in the light of this judgment." 4.7 Learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vikram Cement 2006 (194) ELT 3 as held that the Cenvat Credit Rules and the Modvat scheme are not different and therefore the decision made in the context of Modvat would be equally applicable to Cenvat Credit Rules. It is seen that the decision in the case of Vikram Cement was given by comparing the Modvat rules with the provision of Cenvat credit introduced vide Notification No 27/2000- CE(NT) dated 31.03.2000 by introducing rule 57AA to rule 57AK in Central Excise Rules 1944. It is seen that the said rules were subsequently superseded by Notification No 31/2001 by which a fresh set of Rules namely Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 were introduced. Subsequently, these rules were also superseded by Notification No 5/2002-CE (NT) dated 01.03.2002 whereby, afresh set of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 were introduced. The said rules were again superseded by Notification No 23/2004 dated 10.09.2004 which introduced a fresh set of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to replace the earlier rules. It is ....