Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M.S, Chettinad Cement Corpn. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Trichy on 1 November, 2013
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
E/00259/2005
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.80/2004(TRY)(ADK), dated 21.12.2004 passed by the Commissioner of Cstoms and Central Excise (Appeals), Trichirapalli]
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 the Member wishes to see the fair copy of
the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities? :
M.s, Chettinad Cement Corpn. Ltd.
Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy
Respondent
Appearance:
Shri R. Parthasarathy, Cons. Shri M. Rammohan Rao, DC(AR) For the Appellant For the Respondent CORAM:
Honble Shri P.K. Das, Judicial Member Date of hearing : 04.11.2013 Date of decision : 04.11.2013 Final Order No.40528/2013 Heard both sides and perused the records.
2. The issue involved in this case is whether the Cenvat credit is admissible in respect of explosives, Ammonium Nitrate and Detonators, which are used in mines for blasting/fragmenting the solid lime rocks situated outside the factory. The Honble Supreme Court in the case of Vikram Cement Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore reported in 2006 (197) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.) held that credit is eligible if the mines are captive mines so that they are integrated with the concerned cement factory. On a query from the Bench, the learned Counsel for the appellant submits that in this case it is a captive mine. He also drew the attention of the Bench G.O.MS No.81, dated 13.08.2003 issued by Secretary, Department of Industries, Govt. of Tamil Nadu.
3. In this context, the learned Authorised Representative for the revenue submits that in the present case mines is situated far away from the factory i.e., 40 Kms and the Supreme Court has allowed in respect of mines adjacent to the factory and connected by the railway to the factory.
4. On a perusal of the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Vikram Cement (Supra), I do not find that the credit of duty will be available on inputs and capital goods used in the mines adjacent to factory or connected by railway of the factory.
5. Respectfully following the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Vikram Cement (Supra), impugned orders are set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential reliefs. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) (P.K. DAS) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ksr DRAFT Remarks I II III Date of dictation 01.11.2013 Draft Order - Date of typing 04.11.2013 Fair Order Typing 05.11.2013 Date of numbering and date of dispatch 4