TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 915
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on (1) Ltd Main (Unit-1). 2. 27.08.2005 & 14.09.2005 Imported capital goods Installed at C-2 and H-2 Sheds i.e. Eimco Elecon (1) Ltd (Unit-II) leased premises of Appellant which is certified by the Assistant Commissioner, Anand on 16.04.2007. (Running page No. 34 of the Appeal paper book). 3. 23.09.2005 & 01.04.2006 Credit availed vide Entry No.1120 (50 %) & 1122 (Remaining 50 %) by the Eimco Elecon India Ltd Main Unit-1. 4. 22.09.2005 Prior to availing of Cenvat Credit in the registers of the Unit-II, Appellant Filed application for addition of new premises in the existing premises of Unit-1. (Common registration) (Running page No. 35 of the Appeal paper book) 5. 21.04.2007 The Appellant was however gran....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vat credit by Unit-II on 28.04.2007. Learned counsel argued that it is not in dispute that the said capital goods were used for manufacture of goods by the appellant, the availment of credit in Unit-I cannot be denied. He further pointed out that the said credit for which demand has been made has already been reversed before the same credit was availed in Unit-I on 31.012.2007 which has been allowed by Tribunal vide Order dated 02.01.2009 (supra). He further pointed out that all the facts were known to the Revenue and therefore invoking extended period of limitation is not warranted. He pointed out that show cause notice has been issued on 22.04.2013 in respect of credit availed on 28.04.2007. He pointed out that the demand is also beyond t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y taken on the said capital goods. The department reversed the credit amount of Rs. 87,976/-. The claim made by the respondent assessee for refund of the said amount was on the ground that the capital goods installed in their Mother Roll Plant was eligible for the credit of duty inasmuch as the said plant process the goods of the registered factory. The original authority rejected the claim by holding that 57Q(1) stipulates that the capital goods should be installed in the place of manufacture of final products and not in the place outside the place of manufacture of final products. The Commissioner affirmed the order of the original authority. The respondent approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 15-10-2004 al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he activity of the respondent in the usage of the capital goods can be said to be part of its manufacturing activities of final product in its registered factory. It is also not the case of the appellant that by usage of the capital goods in the Mother Roll Plant, the same was in any way alienated to any one, other than the respondent factory. 8. The salient points noted in the report of the Commissioner established beyond doubt that the capital goods were used in the factory of the respondent for the purpose of manufacture of final products. When the above said conclusion was inevitable, as held by the Tribunal, the respondent was entitled to avail Modvat credit duty paid on the capital goods concerned. Consequently, the order of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re is no justification for denying the credit. Imposition of penalties were also unjustified. In these circumstances, the impugned orders are set aside and appeals are allowed with consequential relief to the appellants." In case of Mileen Engineers (supra) also Tribunal observed in para 7 & 8 as follows: "6. I find that though the appellant has taken credit at the time of receiving of capital goods but it is also fact that capital goods was installed in the adjacent premises and used in relation of manufacture of final product in the registered premises. Since capital goods was used in the manufacture of final product for which excise duty is paid, in my view, credit is admissible from the date of installation and use of ....