TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 737
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt is a manufacturer of sponge iron/ingot/billet/TMT bars falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Appellant has a captive thermal plant installed within the factory for production of electricity. The electricity produced is used for manufacture of dutiable final products on which the Appellant had discharged appropriate excise duty. In the course of production of electricity, Fly Ash is generated. Since the Fly Ash is detrimental to the environment, the Appellant disposes of the same in accordance with the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. For this purpose, the Appellant obtains services to transport such Fly Ash generated in its captive thermal plant to the Ash-pond locaed inside the plant and avails CENVAT C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ash is not a final product of the Appellant and that the service of shifting the Fly Ash was not used in or in relation to manufacturing activities or clearance of the final product. Therefore, the said activity did not qualify as an input service. The Appellants refuted the said contentions of the Revenue before the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) and also submitted a written note dated 31.01.2018. However, without considering the submissions of the Appellant, the Ld.Commissioner(Appeals) allowed the Appeal filed by the Revenue. Hence the present Appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The Ld.Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submitted that it is undisputed fact that the Appellant had been duly discharging appropriate excise duty on clearanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hedut Sakahari Udyog Mandli Ltd. [2012 (279) ELT 402 (Tri.-Ahmd)] 6. The Ld.Authorized Representative for the Department justified the impugned order and submits that the Appeal being devoid of any merits may be rejected. 7. Heard both sides and perused the Appeal records. 8. After hearing both the sides I find that the issue required to be decided in the present appeal is as to whether the services obtained by the appellant for removal of coal fly ash from the captive power plant which is used for generation of power, which in turn, is captively consumed for manufacture of excisable goods, can be held to be an eligible cenvatable input service. As is seen from the submission of the appellant the removal of coal fly ash from captiv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... generation of electricity cannot happen. 10. In view of these facts, it is not correct to say that the removal and disposal of Fly Ash is nothing to do with the manufacture of excisable goods. Admittedly, the electricity generated is captively consumed by the Appellant. Any input services or inputs used for such generation of electricity are necessarily to be considered as input service for final excisable goods. In view of these facts, I find that the impugned order cannot be sustained on merit, regarding denial of various input services or credit with reference to removal and disposal of Fly Ash is mandate of law. 11. The Tribunal in the case of Sanghi Industries Ltd. v. C.C.E., Rajkot - 2009 (236) E.L.T. 617 (Tri.-Ahmd.) = 2010 (2....