Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce, Meerut I vs M/S Rana Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd on 4 September, 2017
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Old Red Building, 38 M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad 211 001 COURT NO. II DATE OF HEARING/DECISION : 04/09/2017. Excise Appeal No. 53024 of 2015 (SM) [Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. MRT/EXCUS/000/APPL-I/24/2015-16 dated 24/04/2015 passed by The Commissioner (Appeals-I), Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Meerut.] CCE, Meerut I Appellant Versus M/s Rana Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. Respondent
Appearance Shri Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Appellant. Shri Alok Arora, Advocate for the Respondent.
Excise Appeal No. 70142 of 2015 (SM) [Arising out of the Order-in-Appeal No. MRT/EXCUS/000/APPEALS -I/165/2015-16 dated 10/08/2015 passed by The Commissioner (Appeals-I), Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Meerut.] CCE, Meerut I Appellant Versus M/s Meenu Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. Respondent Appearance Shri Pradeep Kumar Dubey, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Appellant. Shri Alok Arora, Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM: Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Final Order No. 70858-70859/2017 Dated : 04/09/2017 Per. Ashok Jindal :-
As the issue involved in both the appeals are common, therefore, both the appeals are disposed of by a common order.
2. The facts of the case are that respondent availed Cenvat credit on steel items which has been used for fabrication of capital goods. The show cause notices were issued to the respondent to deny Cenvat credit on these items on the premise that these items are neither input nor capital goods, therefore, respondents are not entitled for Cenvat credit in terms of Rule 2 (A) and Rule 2 (K) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
3. Heard the parties considered the submissions.
4. Considering the fact that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has consider the user test and hold that these items are used for fabrication of capital goods, therefore, in the light of the decision of this Tribunal the case of Singhal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC & CE, Raipur reported in 2016 (341) E.L.T. 372 (Tri. Del.), I hold that the respondent have correctly availed the Cenvat credit. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, the same are set aside. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. (Dictated and pronounced in open court.) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) PK 2 EX/53024, 70142 of 2015