TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 1659
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....admissible, showcause notice was issued to them on 26.07.2010 for recovery of the total duty of Rs.97,05,911/- along with interest and penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed with interest and penalty. Hence the present appeal. 3. At the outset, the learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the learned Commissioner has confirmed the demand solely on the basis of the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur 2010 (253) ELT 440 (Tri. LB). He has submitted that during the course of adjudication, the appellant had submitted copy of the Chartered Engineer Certificate on 07.01.2011 providing details of the description of the goods and the steel item used for fabrication of the capital goods and their parts and accessories used in the factory for manufacture of final products. The Chartered Engineer in the certificate had clearly stated that the inputs in question have been used for fabrication of capital goods namely Belt Conveyor Gantry, Platform for EOT Cranes, Parts for Bag Filter, Parts of Air Slides, Cable Trays, DA Fan Ducts and Silos. He has submitted that the appellant ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one of the above? (C) Is the amendment brought in CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 as per Rule 2 of the CENVAT (Amendment) Rules, 2009 retrospective in nature considering is it clarificatory to be applied to all matters which arise before 7-7-2009, the date of commencement of the CENVAT (Amendment) Rules, 2009 : hereinafter referred to as 'Amendment Rules'. 5. The impugned order of the Tribunal had come up for consideration before different High Courts either cited as precedent or as relied upon by the Tribunal in different other matters. The Gujarat High Court in Mundra Ports & Special Economic Zone Ltd. - 2015 (39) S.T.R. 726 (Guj.) referred to the contents of the amendment, to the extent it is relevant for the purpose of this case and held as follows: "We do not find that amendment made in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 which come into force on 7-7-2009 was clarificatory amendment as there is nothing to suggest in the Amending Act that amendment made in Explanation 2 was clarificatory in nature. Wherever the Legislature wants to clarify the provision, it clearly mentions intention in the notification itself and seeks to clarify existing provision. Even, if the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as an accessory. As a matter of fact, in Saraswathi Sugar Mills case, the Court, while noticing the view taken in Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited said that as long as it could be shown that the item in issue was an integral part of the machinery, i.e., capital goods, it would fall in the definition of 'component' and thus, by logical extension, come within the ambit of 'capital goods'. 43.1 To be noted, Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.K. Jain, (as he then was), was party to both the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court i.e., Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited as well as Saraswathi Sugar Mills Limited case. 43.2 Therefore, quite clearly, the two judgments referred to above cannot be read in the manner, as the Revenue is seeking to read them, that is, at cross purposes. In our opinion, the ratio of the two judgments, is that, as long as it is shown that the "component" and/or "accessory" is an integral part of the capital goods, (which, in turn, fall within the scope and ambit of the expression 'capital goods', referred to in Rule 2(a)(A)(i) of the 2004 Rules,) they would also qualify as capital goods. 44. In the facts of this case, we have....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nput' includes goods, which are used in the manufacture of capital goods for further use in the factory of the manufacturer. On a conjoined reading of the definition of input and Explanation 2 appended thereto, it makes the position clear that inputs are not only goods, which are used in the manufacture of final products, but also those which are 'used in or in relation to' the manufacture of the final product. The relationship between those goods and the final product could be either direct or indirect and may include or may not include their presence in the final products. Goods used in the manufacture of capital goods, which are installed for manufacture of the capital goods should also be considered for availment of Cenvat credit. In the case in hand, the cement and steel bars used to erect foundations for installing different machines in the power plant should also merit consideration as 'input' for the purpose of cenvat benefit. Analyzing and interpreting scope of the definitions of 'input' and 'capital goods', the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Thiru Arooran Sugars & Ors. (Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 3814/2011 and 2695 and 2696/2012) has held that steel and cement....