- (1.) Heard Shri B.K.S. Raghuvanshi, the learned counsel for the appellant. The present appeal has been filed by the Department against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi passed in Appeal No. E/2166/2004/NB (SM).
(2.) On September 1, 2009, this court, while admitting this appeal, formulated following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether the Cenvat credit is admissible on tin plates, steel bar, for steel, red heads, H.R. coils, shape and sections, etc., falling under Chapter 28 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, as capital goods? (ii) Any other points of law that this the hon'ble court may deem fit and proper for order in relation to the issue under consideration.
(3.) The counsel for appellant at the outset stated that similar questions in the context of H.R. plates, sections, steels, etc., have been considered by a Division Bench in Central Excise Appeal No. 331 of 2006, (Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v/s. L.H. Sugar Factories Ltd., [2015] 35 GSTR 246 (All.)), decided on August 28, 2014 and has been answered in favour of the assessee. The court noticed that the assessee has brought the aforesaid items, where they were given a shape as per the requirement of being fitted into capital goods and, therefore, these items were used in factory for fabrication of storage tank for sugar cane juice clarifier. Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules 2001") determines the eligibility of Cenvat credit on capital goods. This court took a view that components, spares and accessories are also eligible for credit.;