Meenakshi Bright Steel Bars Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ...

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 03/2011 dated 10/02/2011 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Guntur]

For approval and signature:

HON'BLE MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes

Meenakshi Bright Steel Bars Pvt. Ltd. Plot No.54, Industrial Development Area, Thumukunta, Hindupur, Ananthapur Dist. Andhra Pradesh Appellant(s)

Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Guntur P.B. No. 331, C.R. Building, Kannavarithota, Guntur  522 004 Andhra Pradesh Respondent(s)

Appearance:

Mr. B. S Janapati, Consultant No. 231, 8th E Main, Kalyan Nagar I Block, Bangalore  560 043 Karnataka For the Appellant

Mr. S. Teli, AR For the Respondent

Date of Hearing: 26/05/2015 Date of Decision: 26/05/2015 CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Final Order No. 21177 / 2015

The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of MS Ingots and TMT Bars etc. and during the relevant period was availing the benefit of cenvat credit of duty paid on Beams, Channels, Joists, Angles, Plates, Bars, Billets etc, as capital goods. As a result of audit objection to the effect that such iron and steel items cannot be considered as capital goods, they reversed the credit in January 2010 to the extent of Rs. 6,19,169/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Nineteen Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Nine only) along with interest of Rs. 1,00,863/- (Rupees One Lakh Eight Hundred and Sixty Three only). Subsequently, realizing that the said items are cenvatable inasmuch as they have been used for fabrication of capital goods, they filed a refund claim dated 10.07.2010 with their jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. The said claim, after due adjudication, was rejected by the lower authorities on the ground that the items in question have been used as supporting structurals, in which case they cannot be held to be cenvatable capital goods. The said order of the Assistant Commissioner was confirmed by Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal.

2. After hearing both the sides duly represented by Mr. B. S Janapati, Consultant and Mr. S. Teli, AR, I find that the short issue requires to be decided is whether various iron and steel items were used as supporting structurals or for fabrication of capital goods. Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that some of the items were admittedly used as supporting structurals, as is clear from the photographs produced before him. However the grievance of the appellant is that he has not referred to all the items which were admittedly used for fabrication of capital goods, as is clear from the observation made by him relatable to only some of the items.

3. I find that the issue requires to be decided is as to whether the items in question were used for supporting structurals or for fabrication of capital goods. The law stands declared by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. Vs. CCE, Raipur reported in [2010 (253) E.L.T. 440 (Tri. - LB)]. As such the factual verification is required to be done in respect of such inputs and the issue is required to be decided based upon such factual examination read with the law declared by the Larger Bench and the amendment carried out in Rule 2(k). As such without expressing any opinion I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for carrying out the necessary verification. Needless to say that the appellant would be associated with such verification and would be given a fair opportunity to put forth their case before the original authority. Appeal is disposed of in the above manner.

(Order pronounced and dictated in open court)

(ARCHANA WADHWA) JUDICIAL MEMBER

iss