Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
The Madras Aluminium Company Ltd vs Cce Salem on 9 January, 2009
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No.E/PD/347/08 & E/421/08
[Arising out of Order-in-Original No.13/2008 (Commissioner) dated 18.6.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Salem]
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr.P.KARTHIKEYAN, Member (Technical)
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? :
The Madras Aluminium Company Ltd.
Appellants
Versus
CCE Salem
Respondent
Appearance:
Shri V.Panchanathan, Advocate Shri N.J.Kumaresh, SDR For the Appellants For the Respondent CORAM:
Honble Mr.P.Karthikeyan, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 9.1.2009 Date of decision : 9.1.2009 Final Order No.____________ After hearing both the parties on the stay application, the appeal paper is taken up for final disposal.
2. The impugned order confirms demand of credit of Rs.3,81,687/- availed by the appellants M/s.The Madras Aluminium Company Ltd. (MALCO) on the item EN Steel Rounds during the years 2002-2007. In the impugned order, the Commissioner found that the steel rounds in question used in the rod mill to crush the bauxite was neither an input nor an item of capital goods. All along the appellants had claimed credit of duty paid on this item as an input. Canvassing the case of the appellants in the appeal filed before the Tribunal, the ld. counsel relies on a decision of the Tribunal in their own case reported as 2001 (136) ELT 182 (Tri.-Chennai.) which had held the impugned item to be an input eligible for MODVAT credit under Rule 57A of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. I have heard the ld. SDR representing the Revenue.
3. On a perusal of the decision of the Tribunal relied upon by the appellants, I find that the Tribunal had found that the impugned item was used in or in relation to the manufacture of final products and upheld the claim of the appellants to credit of duty paid on this item. Following the binding ratio of this decision, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal filed by M/s.MALCO is allowed. Stay application also gets disposed of.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court) (P.KARTHIKEYAN) MEMBER (T) gs 2