2022 (9) TMI 1337

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ommissioner (Appeals) is assailed in this appeal. 2. Facts of the case, in a nutshell, is that Appellant is a manufacturer of Cement and Clinker having Central Excise registration. For the process of manufacture of Cement and Clinker, due to grinding and heating, components of coal mill as well as kiln and cement mills get damaged on account of abrasion and to repair the same, Appellant had used Welding Electrodes and D.A. Gas and also availed credit on tax paid for such purchase of Welding Electrodes and D.A. Gas. The said credit was denied by the Department on the ground that those cannot be treated as inputs as they have no relationship with the manufacture of final product namely cement and clinker. Accordingly, a show-cause-cum demand....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....spondent- Department's contention that these goods have no relationship with the manufacture of final product, for which it has categories the items under the Rule 2(k)(F) of the definition is unfounded for the reasoning that clarificatory Circular No. 943/4/2011-CX dated 29.04.2011 has made it explicitly clear that only credit of goods used in the factory but having absolutely no relationship with the manufacture of final product like furniture and stationary used in the office of the factory are to be disallowed and therefore, the expression "no relationship whatsoever with the manufacture of a final product" must be interpreted and applied strictly and not loosely would mean that indirect use of any goods would be considered as inputs fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....had been issued in 2018 for the disputed period between April, 2013 to June, 2017 without any allegation of wilful misstatement or suppression of facts etc. with intent to evade duty, for which learned Commissioner (Appeals) himself had set aside the penalties including penalty imposed under Rule 15(1) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and on this score alone, the order confirming recovery of CENVAT Credit on extended period would have been set aside. 4. In response to such submissions learned Authorised Representative for the Respondent-Department Mr. P.K. Acharya, while justifying the reasoning and rationality of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), argued with reference to the judgment of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Co....