Case details: Sintex Industries Ltd. vs. Commr. of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-III (2025) 33 Centax 395 (S.C.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Pankaj Mithal & Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.
- S/Shri Rupesh Kumar, Sr. Adv., N. Venkataraman, A.S.G. (N.P.), V.C. Bharathi, Ms. Vishakha, Udai Khanna, Padmesh Mishra, (N.P.)s & Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR (N.P.) for the Petitioner
Facts of the Case
The assessee, a manufacturer of excisable goods, used inputs such as furnace oil in its factory to generate electricity for captive consumption. The electricity so generated was partly consumed within the factory and the remaining was transferred to another unit situated within the same premises. The said unit was a registered separate unit under Central Excise Act, 1944. On audit, the department observed that the assessee had availed Cenvat credit on the inputs used in the generation of electricity, which was partly transferred to another unit. The department contended that Cenvat credit should be restricted to the inputs used in the generation of electricity consumed within the factory.
Supreme Court Held
The matter reached the Gujarat High Court, which held that the assessee was entitled to Cenvat credit on inputs to the extent to which it had used such electricity within the factory registered for that purpose. However, the assessee was not entitled to Cenvat credit for the electricity transferred to the other unit, even though both units were situated within a common boundary wall.Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution.
