Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2023 (4) TMI 1130

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....med during the course of the manufacturing process. They submit that ECS is also contained in the finished goods, i.e. ferro alloys and therefore, it is rightly considered to be an input in terms of Rule 2 (k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2. On the other hand, it is the Revenue's contention that the subject goods are in the nature of capital goods in terms of Rule 2 (a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and accordingly, cenvat credit on them ought to have been availed by the appellants as prescribed for capital goods, that is limiting it two shots of 50% in each of the two financial years. 3. As the appellant had taken cenvat credit of the said goods in one go (not spread over different financial year blocks), they were issued two sho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arious authorities. The fact of use of the said goods and its ultimate consumption in the manufacture of finished goods is not disputed. The electrode carbon paste (ECP) owing to its capability to conduct electricity is essential for the manufacture of the ferro alloys and in the process gets consumed, even being a part of the finished goods. Therefore, it is certainly in the nature of a consumable. 6.1 The Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar Vs. Unifrax India Ltd. reported in 2009 (245) ELT 474 (Tri.- Ahmd.) taking noted of its earlier decision and thereby allowed CENVAT Credit on electrode assembly and needles. It held as: "2......."In Monnet Ispat Ltd. v. C.C.E., Raipur reported in 2002 (148) E.L.T. 1202 ....