2007 (4) TMI 549 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Appeal involving denial of credit on inputs received before amendment to Rule 57G but utilized after the amendment.

Analysis:
The appeal involved fourteen consignments received before the amendment to Rule 57G, which required credit to be taken within six months of input receipt. The appellants' entries were made in RG-23 Part-I before the amendment, but credits were utilized after the stipulated period. The denial of credit was based on the amended rule's restriction. The appellants argued citing a Supreme Court decision in a similar case, emphasizing the subsequent insertion of Section 38A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, with retrospective effect to support their claim for credit beyond the time limit under the unamended Rule 57G.

Analysis Continued:
The Tribunal considered both parties' submissions and referred to the Supreme Court decision in Osram Surya, which addressed a comparable scenario. The Supreme Court had ruled that the amendment to Rule 57G introduced a procedural restriction, not affecting substantive rights. The Court clarified that manufacturers seeking credit beyond the stipulated period were impacted by the amendment. Denying such credit was deemed prospectively valid. The Tribunal, relying on the Supreme Court's decision, rejected the appellants' argument regarding the applicability of Section 38A to grant them credit, concluding that the credit taken beyond six months from the invoice dates was not permissible.

Conclusion:
In alignment with the Supreme Court's decision in Osram Surya, the Tribunal held that the appellants were not entitled to credit utilized beyond the specified six-month period from the invoice dates. Consequently, the appeal was rejected based on the precedent set forth by the Supreme Court judgment.