M/S. Dalmia Chini Mills Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise

[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No. LTU/Dalmia Chini Mills/46/2012 dated 1/05/2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi]

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

M/s. Dalmia Chini Mills Ltd. Appellants

Vs.

Commissioner of Central Excise Respondent

Delhi

Appearance:

Shri Shekhar Vyas, Advocate for the Appellants

Ms. Ranjana Jha, AR for the Respondent

CORAM:

Hon'ble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing /decision: 25.06.2015

ORDER NO. FO/ 52056/2015-Ex(SM)

Per Ashok Jindal :

The short issue involved in these appeals is that whether the appellant is entitled to avail Cenvat Credit on welding electrodes which has been used for repair and maintenance of plant and machinery or not. Learned Counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. vs. CCE Raigad [2015-TIOL-164-CESTAT-Mum] and Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Ltd. vs. CCE Trichy [2014-TIOL- 1719-CESTAT-MAD ]. Therefore, he prayed that they are entitled for Cenvat Credit on welding electrodes which has been used for repair and maintenance of plant and machinery.

2. On the other hand, learned AR opposed the contention of the learned Counsel and submits that the issue has been dealt with by the Apex Court in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd. 2008 (229) ELT A 127 (SC) wherein the SLP filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Apex Court. Therefore, the same is law of the land and the case law relied upon by the learned Counsel have not discussed the decision of Steel Authority of India Ltd (supra), therefore these decisions are per incurim and cannot be relied upon.

3. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions.

4. I have gone through the decision of Tamil Nadu Newsprint and Papers Ltd. (supra) wherein in para 7 of the said decision this Tribunal has referred to decision of Apex Court in the case of Steel Authority of India Ltd (supra) and observed that the SLP filed by Steel Authority of India Ltd against CESTAT Final Order dated 17.7.2007 which has been dismissed by the Apex Court and has observed that mere dismissal of the SLP without giving any reason does not lay down any law. Whereas in the said case, this Tribunal has relied on the decision of Ambuja Cements Easterns Ltd. [2010 (256) ELT 690 (Chattisgarh), Sree Rayalaseema Hi Strength Hypo Ltd. vs. CCE [2012 (278) ELT 167 (AP)] wherein after analyzing the issue, Honble High Court held that Cenvat Credit on welding electrodes which have been used in repair and maintenance of plant and machinery are entitled for Cenvat credit. Therefore, in the light of above cited decision issue is no more res integra. Therefore, I hold that appellants are entitled to avail Cenvat credit on welding electrodes which has been used by them for repair and maintenance of plant and machinery. With these terms, impugned order is set aside. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any.

(Dictated and pronounced in the open court )

( Ashok Jindal ) Member(Judicial)

ss

2