Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Hira Steels Limited vs C.C.E., Raipur on 1 July, 2010
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, West Block No.2, R.K.Puram, New Delhi COURT-IV SINGLE MEMBER BENCH Date of hearing/decision: 1.7.2010 Central Excise Appeal No.1681 of 2008-SM Arising out of the order in appeal No.54/RPR-I/2008 dated 25.5.2008 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals I), Central Excise & Customs, Raipur (C.G.). For Approval and Signature: Honble Shri M. Veeraiyan, Technical Member 1 Whether Press Reporter 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 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? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes M/s Hira Steels Limited . Appellant Vs. C.C.E., Raipur . Respondent
Appearance:
Shri Hemant Bajaj, Advocate for the appellant Shri I. Baig, Authorised Departmental Representative (SDR) for the Revenue Coram: Honble Shri M. Veeraiyan, Technical Member Oral Order No._____________________ Per M. Veeraiyan:
This is an appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) No. 54/RPR-I/2008 dated 25.5.2008.
2. Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order of the original authority in so far as the same relates to denial of credit amounting to Rs.37,522/-and ordered for recovery along with interest and imposition of penalty of Rs.37,522/-.
3. Heard both sides and perused the records.
4. The learned SDR submits that the issue relates to denial of credit amounting to Rs.7092/- on welding electrodes used for repair and maintenance. He also submits that these welding electrodes have not been used directly in relation to the manufacture of the excisable goods. Therefore, the credit is not available.
5. As regards the credit on other items, the same relate to plates, M.S. angle, M.S. channels, steel rounds, ferricast, stainless steel which were used for fabrication of supporting structures and hence the same is not eligible.
6. I have carefully considered the submissions. As regards the credit amounting to Rs.7092/- relating to welding electrodes, the same is eligible as held by the Honble High Court of Chhattisgarh in the case of Ambuja Cement Eastern Ltd. reported in 2010 TIOL 209 HC Chhattisgarh CX.
7. However, the credit relating to other items are not available in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. vs. C.C.E., Raipur reported in 2010 (253) ELT 440. While confirming the denial of credit on these items noting that there were differing interpretations on this issue and the matter was resolved by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vandana Global Ltd. I hold that the penalty is not sustainable.
8. The appeal is disposed of as follows:-
a) The demand of Rs.30,430/- along with interest is upheld.
b) The demand relating to credit of Rs.7092/- on welding electrodes is set aside.
c) The penalty is set aside.
(M. Veeraiyan) Technical Member scd/ 3