Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Hng Float Glass Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara-ii  (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
Appeal Number : Excise Appeal No. 776 of 2012
Date of Judgement/Order : 28/11/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Hng Float Glass Ltd Vs C.C.E. & S.T. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)

We find that the adjudicating authority has denied the cenvat credit in respect of Cement, TMT bars, MS angles, channels, beams, racks, plates, etc. used for making foundation of machineries installed in the factory premises and also for making structures for support of the plant. The credit was denied mainly on the ground that the amendment in Rule 2(a) brought by notification no. 16/2009-CE (N.T.) barred the availment of cenvat credit on the goods in question from retrospective effect. This finding of the adjudicating authority is based on the larger bench judgment of the tribunal in the case of VANDANA GLOBAL LTD. In this regard, we find that much water was flown on this issue and not only the VANDANA GLOBAL LTD. larger bench judgment was upset by the Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of VANDANA GLOBAL LTD.- 2018 (16) GSTL 462 (Chhattisgarh) but also by various subsequent judgment mainly by jurisdictional high court in the case of MUNDRA PORTS & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.- 2015 (39) S.T.R. 726 (Guj.).

In view of the above legal position, the amendment of notification no.16/2009-CE (N.T.) was held to be inapplicable for the period prior to the date of notification i.e. 07.07.2009. On this ground, the denial of cenvat credit by the adjudicating authority is not legal and correct.

As regard the period post 07.07.2009, it is the submission of the appellant that the credit subsequent to this date was already taken prior to 07.07.2009. In this fact, we are of the opinion that the credit was already accrued before the amendment of Rule 2(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 therefore, the amendment of notification no.16/2009-CE (N.T.) shall not apply on such credit which was accrued prior to 07.07.2009. Moreover, the appellant have claimed the credit under capital goods. Such capital goods were as parts and components used as support structure for plant and machinery erected and installed in the factory of the appellant. On this ground also the credit is admissible to the appellant accordingly, we are of the considered view that appellant are entitled for cenvat on the goods in question as per the settled legal position in the various judgments cited by them particularly in the case of Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court judgment in VANDANA GLOBAL LTD. and Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MUNDRA PORTS & SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD. (supra).

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT AHMEDABAD ORDER

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031