AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 525
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... item was excluded from the definition of capital goods at the material time. Further, the said goods also do not fall within the ambit of definition of inputs. I find that in view of the specific exclusion of "office equipments/appliances" from the coverage of 'capital goods' defined under Rule 2(a)(A) during the relevant period CENVAT credit on printers and cartridges is not admissible to the appellant. Further, it has been contended by the appellant that in the SCN, no evidences are placed on record to show that the said goods have been used directly or indirectly in the manufacture of final product. In this regard I find that Rule 9(5) of the CENVAT credit Rules 2004 provide that "the burden of proof regarding the admissibility of the CENVAT credit shall lie upon the manufacturer or provider of output service taking such credit." In view of the discussions supra, I have no substantive reason to interfere in the decision of the adjudicating authority in this issue. C. Regarding third issue. CENVAT credit on corrugated boxes which were delivered at Lawrence Road, Delhi instead of their factory premises amounting to Rs 41,078/- C1. The provisions of Rule 3 of CENVAT cr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....include components, spares and accessories of goods of Chapter 82, 84, 85 and 90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. Computer printer classifiable under Chapter 84 so its parts i.e. cartridge being components accessories or printers also is to be treated as capital goods. He refers to CBEC Circular No.943/04/2011-CX dated 29.04.2011. He further submits that credit of capital goods used in the factory is to be allowed without any relationship with the process of manufacture of the finalized products. * In any case these printers are used for maintaining the essential documents, generation of invoices for the clearance of the goods and hence are used in or in relation to the manufacture of the finished products. * The packing materials which is delivered to the warehouses at Lawrence Road, Delhi were used for packing the finished goods i.e. sugar initially cleared by them in small packets packed in corrugated boxes. * Hon'ble Supreme Court has in case of Vikram Cement Vs CCE, Indore 2006 (194) ELT 3 (SC) held that explosives for blasting mines to produce limestone for use in the manufacture of cement/clinkers in the premises situated at some distance from the mines are eligible f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er for denial of the credit in respect of printers and cartridge counsel for appellant submits that these goods were essential for the production of the finished goods. Further these are part and accessories of the goods classifiable under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and hence the credit in respect of these goods is admissible. He relied on the clarification given by the board at Sr. No.3. The same is reproduced bellow:- S.No. Issue Clarification 1 ......................... ......................... 2 .................... ......................... 3 How is the "no relationship whatsoever with the manufacture of a final product" to be determined? Credit of all goods used in the factory is allowed except in so far as it is specifically denied. The expression "no relationship whatsoever with the manufacture of a final product" must be interpreted and applied strictly and not loosely. The expression does not include any goods used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products whether directly or indirectly and whether contained in the final product or not. Only credit of goods used in the factory but having absolutely no relationship with the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of the definition of 'capital goods' as there is no direct nexus between this item and the output service provided by the appellant. The appellant has not established sufficient nexus between printers and their output service. There is substance in this submission. The appellant has not proved that the printers were used for the purpose of providing mobile telephone service." Affirming this decision Hon'ble Bombay High Court held as follows: "21. A plain reading of the definition of 'capital goods' as defined under Rule 2(a)(A) of the Credit Rules show that all goods falling under Chapter 82, Chapter 84, Chapter 85, Chapter 90, Heading No. 6805, grinding wheels and the like, and parts thereof falling under Heading 6804 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act; pollution control equipments; components, spares and accessories of the goods specified at sub-clauses (i) and (ii) which are used either in the factory for manufacture of final products but does not include any equipment or appliance used in the office and those used for providing output service. A combined reading of sub-clause (a)(A)(i) and (iii) and sub-rule (2) indicates that only the category of goods....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g of sub-clauses (a)(A) (i) and (iii) and sub-rule (2) indicates that only the category of goods in Rule 2(a)(A) falling under clause (i) and (iii) used for providing output services can only qualify as capital goods and none other. Admittedly the goods in question namely the tower and part thereof, the PFB and the printers do not fall within the definition of capital goods and hence the appellants cannot claim the credit of duty paid on these items. Even applying the ratio of the judgments as relied upon by the appellants as observed above the said goods in the present context cannot be classified as capital goods. 32. As regards second contention of the appellants that the tower and part thereof, the PFB and the printers would also falls under the definition of 'input' as defined under Rule 2(k) also cannot be sustained. The definition of inputs as defined under Rule 2(k) includes all goods, except light diesel oil, high speed diesel oil, motor spirit, commonly known as petrol, used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products whether directly or indirectly and whether contained in the final product or not and includes lubricating oils, greases, cutting oils, coolants....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding of the statutory provisions. They are not binding upon the court. It is for the Court to declare what the particular provision of statute says and it is not for the Executive. Looked at from another angle, a circular which is contrary to the statutory provisions has really no existence in law." 4.7 In respect of the Cenvat credit on the packing material which was delivered at the warehouses located at Lawrence Road, Delhi. I do not find much justification in the order, it is settled principle in law till the time it can establish that the inputs were used in or in relation to manufacture and clearance of the finished products. The Cenvat credit in respect of the same cannot be denied. It is also the depot has been considered as the place of the clearance for the excisable goods, warehouse where these boxes were delivered is a depot of the appellant from where sugar was cleared after being repacked in these corrugated boxes, these facts are not in dispute." 4.8 I do not find any merits in denying the credit in respect of the packing materials so used in case of Hawkins Cookers Ltd. Vs CCE Mumbai-III 2014 (299) ELT 103 (Tri-Mum) following has been held:- "3. The case of the ....