2023 (8) TMI 127

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m considering them as capital goods as well as input. These goods were used for erection/ fabrication and manufacture of new tank. The facts of the case are that the appellant are provider of service of storage and warehousing service. They have used the aforesaid goods for fabrication, erection and construction of storage tank on which they have availed Cenvat credit and the said Cenvat credit was utilized for payment of service tax for 'storage and warehousing' service. The Revenue has disallowed the Cenvat credit on the ground that the tank constructed and erected by the appellant is not moveable goods accordingly, in terms of Rule 3(1), the appellant is not entitled for Cenvat credit. 2. Shri Amal Dave, learned Counsel appearing on beh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing process stands vitiated; and the impugned order is therefore void in law. A perusal of the order passed by the Commissioner shows that various submissions and explanations tendered by the appellant are just discarded, and binding precedents in form of decisions of this Hon'ble and judgments of the Courts of Law have also not been considered at all though brought to the notice of the Commissioner. The appellant has explained in the adjudication proceedings that the Circulars issued by the Board holding that storage tanks were not movable and not excisable goods were not relevant in this case because the issue involved was not whether storage tanks attracted excise duty or not, and the appellant has also brought to the notice of the C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a case assumes because arbitrariness in adjudication is avoided when reasons are given by the adjudicating authority. In the instant case, however, no grounds or reasons are given by the Commissioner for not relevant submissions and explanations tendered by the appellant; and no discussion at all is made in the impugned order as regards the case law cited by the appellant in adjudication proceedings. The Commissioner has recorded at para 9(c) of the impugned order the case law relied upon by the appellant in support of the submission that Cenvat credit was admissible even when immovable property was constructed, fabricated or erected by using inputs, capital goods and input services, and the Commissioner has also recorded at para 9(d) of th....