Page 147 - GSTL_23rd April 2020_Vol 35_Part 4

2020 ] IN RE : JSW ENERGY LIMITED 473
In the above-mentioned decision, The Hon’ble Court had examined the
meaning of the ‘input’ under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and admissibility of
credit of tax on such input.
Personal Hearing :
53. The personal hearing in the matter was conducted on 20-11-2019,
wherein Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Appellant, re-
iterated the written additional submissions filed on 10-7-2019 as well as the other
relevant submissions filed earlier before us. Shri J.B. Shirsat, the jurisdictional
officer in the present appeal matter, also attended the above said hearing, where-
in he reiterated the written submissions filed in response to the subject additional
submissions dated 10-7-2019 of the Appellant.
Discussions and Findings :
54. Heard both the parties. We have also gone through the entire case
records including all the written submissions and documentary evidences,
placed before us. We have also gone through the Hon’ble Bombay High Court
Order dated 7-6-2019, wherein it was directed to reconsider the subject appeal in
light of the additional submissions to be filed by the Appellant with regard to the
‘new grounds’ adopted by us while issuing the impugned AAAR Order dated 2-
7-2019. The aforesaid two ‘new grounds’, observed by the Hon’ble High Court in
the impugned AAAR order, are as under :
(i) That coal, which is used for manufacture of electricity and thereafter
steel, is not covered as input under the Standard Input Output
Norm for steel products under the Foreign Trade Policy;
(ii) That in the proposed arrangement, Coal would stand consumed
and therefore, was irretrievable in the same form after the conclu-
sion of the job work. Therefore, the proposed arrangement did not
fulfil the conditions prescribed under section 143 of the CGST Act in
relation to bringing back the same inputs by the principal.
55. As regards the above-mentioned new ground enumerated at Sr. (i)
above, the Appellant, vide their additional submissions dated 10-7-2019, have
inter alia contended that the steam coal, proposed to be supplied to the Appellant
i.e. JEL, constitutes one of the inputs for JSL, which manufactures the steel prod-
ucts, as the coal proposed to be sent by JSL to the Appellant will be supplied
back in the form of electricity, which in turn are used by JSL to manufacture their
final products i.e. steel. They, inter alia, have place their reliance on the definition
of ‘inputs’ as defined under Section 2(59) of the CGST Act, which, they averred,
is wide enough to cover the steam coal, proposed to be sent by JSL to JEL for
conversion into electricity on the job work basis. The said definition of input is
reproduced as follows :
‘input’ means any goods other than capital goods used or intended to be
used by a supplier in the course or furtherance of business;
(Emphasis supplied)
For the said purpose, reliance was also placed on the term ‘business’ which
is defined under Section 2(17) of the CGST Act. For the said purpose :
Business includes -
(a) Any trade, commerce, manufacture, profession, vocation, adventure,
wager or any other similar activity, whether or not it is for a pecuni-
ary benefit,
GST LAW TIMES  23rd April 2020  267