9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 470 - AT - Central ExciseExtended period of limitation - CENVAT credit - inputs issued by the units, who are availing exemption under Notification No. 01/10-CE dt. 06.02.2010 - area based exemption - credit denied on the premise as per Notification No. 02/14-CE (N.T.) dt. 20.01.2014, the appellant was not entitled to credit prior to the Notification No. 01/10-CE dt. 06.02.2010 - period involved in this case is 01.06.2012 to 19.01.2014 but SCN issued by invoking extended period on 21.06.2017. HELD THAT - In their own case M/S. B.R. AGROTECH LTD. VERSUS CCE ST, JAMMU 2018 (10) TMI 1828 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH for the same period, this Tribunal has already held that extended period of limitation is not invokable holding that when the Revenue is having divergent views on the issue, the extended period of limitation is not applicable. The extended period of limitation is not invokable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues: Denial of credit based on Notification No. 02/14-CE (N.T.) dt. 20.01.2014 and Notification No. 01/10-CE dt. 06.02.2010, invocation of extended period of limitation for show cause notice, divergent views on credit allowance for similarly placed assessees in the State of Jammu & Kashmir.
Issue 1: Denial of credit based on Notification No. 02/14-CE (N.T.) dt. 20.01.2014 and Notification No. 01/10-CE dt. 06.02.2010 The appellant appealed against the denial of credit based on the premise that they were not entitled to credit prior to Notification No. 01/10-CE dt. 06.02.2010. The appellant, located in Jammu & Kashmir, availed the benefit of exemption under this notification. The Revenue contended that during the relevant period of 01.06.2012 to 19.01.2014, an assessee could not avail credit against inputs from units enjoying exemption under Notification No. 01/10-CE. The appellant's credit was denied, but the Tribunal observed that after the amendment introduced by Notification No. 02/14-CE (N.T.) dt. 20.01.2014, credit became available to the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the denial of credit, emphasizing the amendment's impact on the entitlement to credit. Issue 2: Invocation of extended period of limitation for show cause notice The appellant argued that the show cause notice issued on 21.06.2017 for the period of 01.06.2012 to 19.01.2014 was beyond the extended period of limitation. Citing a previous order in the appellant's favor, the Tribunal noted that the extended period of limitation was not applicable in cases where the Revenue had divergent views on credit allowance for similarly placed assessees. As the show cause notice invoked the extended period of limitation, the Tribunal held that the denial of credit was time-barred. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief. Issue 3: Divergent views on credit allowance for similarly placed assessees in the State of Jammu & Kashmir The Tribunal highlighted that in cases where similarly placed assessees in Jammu & Kashmir were allowed credit, appeals had been filed by the Revenue before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal's observation that the Revenue held divergent views on the issue of credit allowance for such assessees influenced the decision to not invoke the extended period of limitation. By setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal, the Tribunal emphasized consistency in credit allowance decisions for similarly situated assessees. In conclusion, the judgment addressed the denial of credit based on specific notifications, the invocation of the extended period of limitation for the show cause notice, and the significance of consistent decisions on credit allowance for assessees in similar circumstances. The Tribunal's decision to set aside the denial of credit and allow the appeal underscored the importance of adherence to legal provisions and precedents in tax matters.
|
