TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 841
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....S Beams, MS Angles, electrodes etc., (hereinafter referred to as MS Structurals) under the category of 'capital goods'. The MS structurals were used by the appellant towards the erection of various capital goods such as hopper house, crushing house, screening house, stock house, chamber house, iron ore pre-heating Klin platform & house, PH Klin to Main Klin transfer chute & house, Main Klin platform, Klin to Cooler transfer chute & house, shed for coal, central control maintenance room, etc. 3. Consequent to audit, the appellant was issued the Show Cause Notice dated 06.01.2012 invoking the extended period of limitation. The appellant submitted a detailed reply contesting the allegations in the SCN and also produced a Charted Engineer's certificate to prove that the MS Structurals were used in the machineries erected at their plant where manufacturing activity is carried out. 4. Learned Commissioner passed the Order-in-Original holding the allegations in the SCN. 5. The appellant being aggrieved by the impugned order/O-I-O filed this appeal before the CESTAT. 6. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the Explanation 2 to Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 200....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the case of M/s Super Smelters Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax, Bolpur [2025 (9) TMI 478 - CESTAT Kolkata] is very much applicable to the present case as it is of similar facts. The appellant already submitted before the Adjudicating Authority, the appellant submitted Chartered Engineer's Certificate in support of their claim that the MS Structurals were used in the manufacture of capital goods erected in their plant. The capital goods manufactured using the MS Structurals are classifiable under Chapter 84 which is well within the definition of 'capital goods' as per Rule 2(a)(A)(iii) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and accordingly eligible for CENVAT Credit as inputs used for manufacture of capital goods. 10. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the Adjudicating Authority has taken another ground for denial of credit in the present case that the inputs are used for fabrication of facilities for capital goods viz., Hopper House, Crushing House, Screening House, Chamber House, Iron-Ore Pre-heating klin platform etc., which are in the nature of immovable property attached to earth and therefore cease to be goods. The similar issue was raised by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(k) categorically excluded such items and structures from the definition of input. The Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of M/s Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd., Vs Union of India & Others [2013 (9) TMI 24 - Allahabad HC], M/s Daya Sugar Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut - 1 [2014 (10) TMI 722 - Allahabad High Court] held that the items were used in construction of a platform and were not used anywhere as a part of the machinery and the amendment of Explanationn-2 of Rule 2 (K) by Notification dated 07.07.2009 is clarificatory in nature as the items specified were always held to be excluded in the manufacture of capital goods. 15. Learned AR submits that the Charted Engineer Certificate states that the quantities of steel have been used in fabrication or manufacture of various equipment and the required facilities of the sponge iron plant. However, the certification would not adduce any evidence that the quantities of steel items were used in manufacture / fabrication of capital goods in the first place. The burden of proof regarding the admissibility of the CENVAT Credit shall lie upon the manufacturer or provider of output service. He also submits that there is no bonaf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....MI 1594], however, it appears that neither of the parties had brought to the notice of the Bench the subsequent decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow Vs M/s Mankapur Chini Mills, Gonda [2019 (5) TMI 1583-Allahabad High Court] wherein, Hon'ble High Court discussed in detail other High Court's decision on the same issue and earlier decision in the case of M/s Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd., decided by same High Court and held that M/s Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd., supra, is not applicable under the fact and circumstances of the case. In this regard it is important to cite relevant para of the judgment which is as thus: "32. On going through the record, we find that the Revenue has relied upon the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global (supra), wherein, it was held that the explanation added to the definition of capital goods w.e.f. 07.07.2009 has to be held as explanatory and thus retrospective in nature. The said decision of the Tribunal was considered by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mundra Ports & Special Economic Zone Ltd., (supra), wherein, the said decision was not approved by th....