Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. During the course of hearing of this appeal, learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Rajesh Ostwal submitted that denial of credits to the Appellant was primarily on the items being used in the manufacturing process namely FRP Grating, Joist, Ladder & Platform and Angle Channel, Pallet Racking System & Metal Furniture, M S Cable Tray, Pipe & Handling Equipment, Hot Dip Galvanized Ladder Tray / Cable Tray, Led Flame Glass which all qualify for availment of credits both as accessories of capital goods and as products used in the manufacturing process. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehra Bros. Vs. JC - [1991 (51) ELT 173 (SC)], Pragati Silicones Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2007 (211) ELT 534 (SC)], CCE Vs. Insulation Electrical (P) Ltd. - [2008 (224) E/87054/2019 ELT 512 (SC)], he further submitted that accessories are supplementary and subordinating nature which are not required to be essential for actual functioning of the product, which fact is well explained in CBEC Circular No. 276/110/96-TRU dated 02.12.1996 wherein it was clarified that all parts, components, accessories, which are to be used with capital goods and classifiable under any Chapter Heading are eligible for availment of CENVAT Credits. Further, in placing reliance on the judgments of Hindustan Petroleum Vs. CGST - [2018 (11) TMI 723 - CESTAT Chennai], Minda Sai Limited Vs. CCE - [2019 (5) TMI 1245 - CESTAT New Delhi], Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2018 (5) TMI 966 - CESTAT Mumbai], Kohler India Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. [CCE - 2018 (2) TMI 614 - T], Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2017 (12) TMI 1149- CESTAT Mumbai], Gestamp Sungwoo Automotive (Chennai) P. Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2018 (363) ELT 1191 (T)], Sree Ramicides Chemicals P. Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2014 (311) ELT 102 (T)], Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2015 (330) TMI 645 (T)], he argued that both Pallet Racking System & Metal Furniture i.e. heavy duty rack were held to be inputs and credits were allowed thereof. Likewise in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. CCE - [2018 (1) TMI 221- CESTAT], Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs. Commissioner of CGST - [2020 (4) TMI 273- CESTAT], ITC Ltd. Vs. CC - [2016 (11) TMI 932 - CESTAT Hyderabad], Bharat Oman Refineries Ltd. Vs. CGST - [2018

4. In response to such submissions learned Authorised Representative for the Respondent-Department Mr. Amrendra Kumar Jha argued in favour of reasoning and rationality of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and had drawn attention of this E/87054/2019 Bench to para 8(iii) of the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein he had mentioned about the ground of rejection of credit benefits to the Appellant on Pallet Racking Systems/Metal Furniture of Steel and LED Flame Glass as they are falling under Chapter 94 and Chapter 94 respectively on the ground that no evidence was submitted by the Appellant to prove that the same were used for storing raw material/finished goods as claimed by the Appellant and not used in the office nor LED Glass Flame could be established to be capital goods or its components, spares or accessories. In respect of other items he fairly conceded that judicial decisions have covered those as inputs credits. Learned Authorised Representative further submitted that Appellant had reversed credit on Joist, Ladder & Platform and Angle Channel alongwith interest for which, it should not have sought for allowing credits on those items at the appellate stage and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Jawahar Mills Ltd. reported in 2001 (132) ELT 3 (S.C.) relates to electrical wires and not to LED Flame Glass for which reasoned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not be interfered with except on those items in which judicial precedent had settled the issue.

5. Having regard to the submissions made by both the sides and upon perusal of the relied upon case laws what is required to be considered here is whether on Pallet Racking System/Metal Furniture and LED Flame Glass, credit can be extended since for rest of items, this Tribunal would be bounded by the judicial precedent set by itself, E/87054/2019 apart from the fact that on Joist, Ladder & Platform and Angle Channel Appellant had accepted the stand taken by the Respondent- Department and reversed the credit with interest before April, 2018 and not pressed for this issue. On these 3 items Appellant had submitted related case laws like the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Jawahar Mills Ltd. (supra) that deals with electrical wires with a request to accept/treat LED Flame Glass in the similar footing. It has also cited judgments on Pallet Racking System & Metal Furniture etc., as narrated above, and explained that item named as metal furniture were basically heavy duty racks on which products were being stored and a physical visit to the Appellant company would have clarified the doubt raised by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in his order under para 8(iii) that no evidence was produced to proof that those were not used in the office but used in the production process. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further submitted that Bulb (LED Flame Glass) itself is covered under Chapter 85 and the same used as a part or accessories of vessel or machine to manufacture final product and the same vessel as a machine is itself a machine covered under Chapter 84 that is included under capital goods. Be that as it may, it is not understood as to why the clarificatory Circular of the CBEC bearing No. 276/110/96-TRU dated 02.12.1996 that includes all parts, accessories and components used with the capital goods and covered under any Chapter Heading is eligible for availment of CENVAT Credit is not considered by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that would have covered these 3 items also. Therefore, E/87054/2019 having regard to the precedent set by this Tribunal and in order to maintain consistency and predictability of the order to be passed by the Tribunal and with due regard to the clarification issue vide above noted Circular No. 276/110/96, the following order is passed.