2026-VIL-1290-CESTAT-CHD-CE
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-1290-CESTAT-CHD-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Eligibility of credit on inputs procured for use in fabrication of capital goods by contractor service provider – Appellant manufacturer engaged contractors for fabrication of storage tanks and mechanical piping, procured inputs either directly or supplied them free of cost to contractors, all inputs were received in factory premises with appellant as consignee in invoices, excise duty and service tax paid on inputs was reimbursed by appellant – Department denied Cenvat credit alleging that the inputs were inputs for contractors-service providers and not for appellant, and credit was availed in violation of Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 – Whether manufacturer is entitled to avail Cenvat credit on inputs procured by itself or by contractors on its behalf and received in its factory premises when contractors used such inputs for fabricating capital goods that are ultimately used by manufacturer in production of excisable final products – HELD – Cenvat credit is attached to goods depending on their usage and not to persons, and there is no condition in Cenvat rules that attaches credit to ownership of goods or belongingness to a person. The primary and essential conditions for availing credit are that goods must be duty paid and must be used in or in relation to excisable goods directly or indirectly in the factory of production – All conditions prescribed under Rules 2(k), 3, 4 and 9 of CCR, 2004 are satisfied as inputs satisfy definition, have been received in factory, conditions are adhered to and invoices meet requirements – When the inputs have a direct nexus with manufacture of final products as they are used for fabrication of capital goods further used by manufacturer in production of final products, the manufacturer is entitled to avail credit where contractor-service provider has not availed abatement of service tax – The extended period cannot be invoked as there is no wilful suppression of facts and appellant regularly filed returns, provided all information, was under bona fide belief and statutory returns do not require disclosure of usage of inputs – Appeals partly allowed by remand for re-quantification on the basis that appellant is eligible for credit on inputs not covered by contractor's abatement benefit and ineligible where contractor availed abatement
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTAT Filing Near: Closing Resolutions...
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?