Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. The National Co-Operative Sugar ... vs Cce, Madurai on 7 August, 2009
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI
E/311/2009
(Arising out of Order in Appeal No. 52/2009 dated 26.02.2009, passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Madurai).
For approval and signature
Honble Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, Technical Member
___________________________________________________________
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 Honble Member wishes to see the fair :
copy of the Order.
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the :
Departmental Authorities? ___________________________________________________________
M/s. The National Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. : Appellant
Vs.
CCE, Madurai : Respondent
Appearance Shri N. Prasad, Adv., for the appellant Ms. Indira Sisupal, JDR, for the respondent CORAM Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, Technical Member Date of hearing : 07.08.09 Date of decision : 07.08.09 Final ORDER No._____________ Heard both sides. Shri N. Prasad, Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellants states that the issue involved in this appeal is relating to admissibility of cenvat credit in respect of welding electrodes used for repair and maintenance of machinery. He relies on the following two decisions in support of his claim that cenvat credit should be allowed in respect of welding electrodes.
a. Hindustan Zinc Ltd. Vs. UOI 2008 (228) ELT 517 (Raj.) b. UP State Sugar Corporation Ltd. Vs. CCE 2009-TIOL-452-CESTAT-DEL
2. Heard Ms. Indira Sisupal, Ld.JDR appearing for the department supports the impugned order and states that cenvat credit on welding electrodes is not admissible in view of the following decisions:
i. Jaypee Rewa Plant Vs. CCE, Raipur 2003 (159) ELT 553 (Tri.LB) ii. Sail Vs. CCE, Ranchi 2008 (222) ELT 233 (Tri.-Kol.) iii. Sail Vs. CCE, Ranchi 2009 (229) ELT A 127 (S.C.)
3. After hearing both sides and perusal of cited decisions, I find that the use of welding electrodes in this case is for maintenance and repair of the machinery about which there is no dispute. The admissibility of cenvat credit for welding electrodes used for repair and maintenance was considered and disallowed by the Tribunal in the case of SAIL (cited supra) following the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Jaypee Rewa Plant Vs. CCE, Raipur (supra), and the appeal filed by SAIL against the said order has been dismissed by the Honble Supreme Court as reported in 2009 (229) ELT A 127 (S.C.). In view of the fact that the matter has been settled by the order of the apex Court, the appeal has no merit apart from the fact that the amount involved is very small. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.
(Order pronounced and dictated in the open Court) (Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY) TECHNICAL MEMBER BB 3