The Commissioner Of Central v. M/S Automotive

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated:28/7/2016 C O R A M The Honourable Mr.Justice S.Manikumar and The Honourable Mr.Justice D.Krishnakumar Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3053 of 2009 The Commissioner of Central Excise Chennai II Commissionerate No.692 MHU Complex Anna Salai, Nandanam Chennai 600 035.

...Appellant Vs.

1. M/s.Automotive Coaches & Components Ltd Plot No.C1 & D6 Sipcot Industrial Complex Gummidipoondi 601 201.

2. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zone Bench Shastri Bhavan Annex 1st Floor, No.26 Haddows Road, Chennai 600 006.

...Respondents

Prayer:

Appeal filed under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the Final Order No.1007 of 2009 dated 18/8/2009 in Appeal No.E/581 & 582/2002 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Chennai.

For Appellant : Mr.K.Mohana Murali Standing Counsel for Customs & Central Excise For Respondents : Mr.P.R.Ranganath for R.1 Tribunal - for R.2.

- - - - - -

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J) This Appeal has been filed against the Final Order No.1007 of 2009 dated 18/8/2009 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Chennai.

2. The substantial questions of law raised in the instant appeal are:- "1.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that ownership is not a criteria for availing credit of capital goods?

2.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in Law in relying on the judgment in the case of M/s.Iljin Automotive Pvt Ltd., Vs. CCE, Chennai, as reported in 2004 (175) ELT 169 (Tri-Chennai) where the facts are totally different?

3.

Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal having seen that the sub-Rule 7 (4) of CENVAT Credit Rules, provides for Cenvat credit only in respect of capital goods belonging to manufacturer, even if the capital goods are acquired by him on lease, hire purchase or loan agreement from a Financing Company, went wrong in holding that the respondent is entitled to the credit. The respondent has not satisfied any of the conditions mentioned therein, so as to entitle him to claim the credit?"

3. On this day, when the matter came up for hearing, Mr.K.Mohana Murali, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Department submitted that on the basis of the instructions given in Circular No.I/10/10/2016 Legal, dated 21/3/2016, appellant department has instructed him to withdraw the appeal.

4. Placing on record the above submission, while dismissing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3053 of 2009, as withdrawn, substantial question of law raised is left open. No Costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. mvs.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar

To

1. The Commissioner of Central Excise Chennai II Commissionerate No.692 MHU Complex Anna Salai, Nandanam Chennai 600 035.

2. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zone Bench Shastri Bhavan Annex 1st Floor, No.26 Haddows Road, Chennai 600 006.

+ 1 cc to Mr.K.Mohana Murali, Advocate Sr 42661 KR/9/9/16 Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.3053 of 2009