2023 (4) TMI 1073

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng aside the final order dated 05.07.2018 (Annexure A-3) passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby appeal filed by the respondent has been allowed. Before the Tribunal, respondent-IOL Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Limited had filed an appeal against the order, wherein Cenvat credit on the steel items i.e. M.S. Plates, MS Sheets/Aluminium Coil, Joist/Square/joist Challen/HR Plates/Shapes & Sections/MS Channels, Angels, Welding electrodes CRSS Patti/HRSS Plates/HR Coil/Sheets etc. were denied on the ground that those items were not capital goods in terms of Rule 2(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, therefore, the respondent was not entitled to avail Cenvat credit on the sai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....45/-. The show cause notice dated 03.06.2011 (Annexure A-1) was issued by extending the period of limitation, under Section 11A of the Act, asking the respondent as to why:- (i) The Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 2,49,21,545/- (Rs. 2,24,198,102/- BED, Cess of Rs. 4,83,196/-, SHE of Rs. 2,40,247/-) should not be disallowed and recovered from them under Rule 14 of the Rules read with Section 11A of the Act by invoking extended period of limitations as provided under first proviso to Section 11A of the Act and the amount of Rs. 5,64,467/- already paid by them should not be adjusted towards the above amount; (ii) Interest in terms of Section 11AB of Central Excise Act, 1944 should not be recovered from them at the appropriate ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... High Court. At the same time, learned counsel for the respondent has referred to another judgment passed by the Chhattisgarh High Court in Vandana Global Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. & Cus, Raipur, 2018 (16) G.S.T.L. 462 (Chhattisgarh), wherein similar view has already been taken in favour of the assessee. A perusal of this judgment shows that the Chhattisgarh High Court had again considered the same question of law and observed as under:- "4. In the light of the contents of the impugned order of the Tribunal and submissions of the assessee and the Revenue following substantial questions of law are formulated for consideration: (A) Whether the terms 'capital goods' excludes the structures embedded to earth? ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... clarification on particular thing or goods and/or input and as such, the amendment could operate only prospectively." 6. That view has been quoted with approval by the Madras High Court in M/s. Thiruarooran Sugars v. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CMA 3814/2014 and connections) decided on 10.07.2017 [2017 (355) E.L.T. 373 (Mad.)] to conclude that the said amendment cannot be treated as clarificatory. M/s Thiruarooran Sugars also considered the issue as to the effect and fundamental value of the evidentiary statement made by the Finance Minister dealing with an amendment in the budget speech." Hence, a consistent view has been taken that benefit of Cenvat credit is to be given in respect of the goods like an....