9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 18 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - not registered at the time of availing credit - credit transferred to M/s. Samruddhi Cement Ltd on demerger and subsequent transfer thereof to appellant consequent to amalgamation - Held that - in respect of disputed credit of 4, 32, 74, 207/- being credit availed before registration of Grasim the issue is fully settled in favour of the appellants vide the case law Well Known Polyesters Ltd. V/s CCE Vapi 2011 (1) TMI 664 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD . In respect of the remaining amount of 80, 52, 675/- the issue of credit on steel structural etc. has already been decided in favour of appellant by the Tribunal in M/s India Cements Ltd. Vs CCE 2016 (6) TMI 1143 - CESTAT HYDERABAD . With regard to credit on technical documentation as the same has been related to import of technical documents as dutiable goods and CVD paid thereof credit of CVD suffered cannot be denied. With regard to remaining items they all fall within the ambit of eligible input services prior to 01.04.2011. CENVAT credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues: Disputed credit availed before registration, denial of certain input credits, applicability of definition of 'input service,' reliance on tribunal decisions, retrospective effect of clarificatory notification, admissibility of credit on MS items for capital goods, justification of denial of credit.
Analysis: 1. Disputed Credit Availed Before Registration: The dispute involved an amount of ?4,32,74,207/- related to credit disallowed by the lower authority on the grounds that the appellant was not registered at the time of availing the credit. The appellant argued that credit availed prior to registration cannot be denied if the assessee is eligible, citing relevant tribunal decisions. The tribunal found in favor of the appellant, stating that the issue was settled in their favor based on the case laws presented. 2. Denial of Certain Input Credits: A remaining disputed credit amount of ?80,52,675/- was in question, concerning credits on various inputs and input services. The appellant provided justifications for each category of credit denied, such as technical documentation, steel structurals, and various input services. The tribunal analyzed each category and found that the credits were eligible based on the specific circumstances presented by the appellant. 3. Applicability of Definition of 'Input Service': The appellant argued that certain credits were denied based on the definition of 'input service' before the amendment effective from 01-04-2011. The tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that the credits were availed before the amendment and, therefore, were not debarred by the revised definition at the material time. 4. Reliance on Tribunal Decisions: The appellant relied on tribunal decisions to support their case regarding the disputed credits. The tribunal considered the precedents cited by the appellant and found them to be applicable in the present case, leading to a favorable decision for the appellant. 5. Retrospective Effect of Clarificatory Notification: The tribunal discussed the retrospective effect of a clarificatory notification related to the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Citing relevant judgments and the view taken by the Larger Bench of the tribunal, the tribunal concluded that the denial of credit based on the clarificatory notification was unjustified and set aside the impugned order. 6. Admissibility of Credit on MS Items for Capital Goods: The tribunal examined the admissibility of credit on MS items used for fabrication/erection of capital goods. Citing judgments from previous cases, the tribunal held that the denial of credit on such items was unjustified, aligning with the propositions laid out in the appellant's own case law. In conclusion, the tribunal found the appellant eligible for availing the entire disputed credit amount of ?5,13,26,882/- and allowed the appeal with consequential benefits, following the legal principles and precedents discussed during the proceedings.
|
