2025 (5) TMI 1687

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant is a manufacturer of C.I. Sanitary Casting, Slag Pot, Bottom Plate, iron Casing, C.I. Weight, Ingot Mould, etc. During the impugned periods i.e., April 2011 to February 2013 and March 2013 to June 2017, the appellant had availed and utilized CENVAT Credit of duty paid on the materials such as M.S. Round, M.S. Flat, M.S. Plate, M.S. Joists, M.S. Angle, M.S. Channel and TMT Bars received in their factory. The Revenue alleged that by such availment of credit on the above goods, the appellant have contravened the provisions of Rule 2(k) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 on the ground that the said goods were neither inputs nor capital goods and had not been utilized in or in relation to the manufacture of final products. 3. Acc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the appellant. Accordingly, the Ld. Counsel for the appellant prays for setting aside the impugned orders. 8. On the other hand, the Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue supported the impugned orders. 9. Heard the parties and considered their submissions. 10. We find that the very same issue has been dealt with by this Tribunal, in the appellant's own case vide Final Order No. 76963 of 2019 dated 17.12.2019 in Excise Appeal No. 184 of 2012 [CESTAT, Kolkata], wherein this Tribunal has observed has under: - "7. The contention of the appellant is that they are exporting cast article of iron and steel and for that they require packing material which they are making from MS Ro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... MS angles, MS channels, MS flat, MS joist, plywood lead scrap and aluminium scrap has been utilized for manufacturing of packing material. 10. Prima facie, we find that the contention is that during the material period, they have exported the quantity of 40,000 MT (Approx.) and the input utilized for the packing material was only 2,000 MT approx. which is only 2%, which is also not disputed by the Commissioner. In such a situation we do not find any substance in the charge that the inputs have not been used in the manufacture of packing materials, which were used as the packing material for export goods. Accordingly, the impugned order is not sustainable and liable to be set aside, which we do so. Appeal is accordingly allowed." ....