9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 759X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the material procured in the year 2006-07 and 2007-08 on the basis of Bills of Entry which were issued prior to one year under which the inputs were received prior to one year in their own factory and further on the ground that the appellants have availed CENVAT credit on the basis of various Bills of Entry wherein the name of the importer given as M/s. SGS India Pvt. Ltd., Usha House, 210, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase III, New Delhi indicating that the inputs covered by the said Bills of Entry were received at the assessees other unit. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellants are before us. 2. The learned Advocate for the appellants submits that the demands confirmed in the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmitted that the appellants have not taken the credit immediately hence, the adjudicating authority has rightly denied the credit. At this juncture, Shri A.K. Prasad, Jt. CDR also contended that the matter should be referred to the Larger Bench as the decision relied upon by the learned Advocate is distinguishable and same cannot be relied upon, and this Tribunal has ample power to refer the judgment by differentiate from the decision in the case of Philips India Ltd. (supra). 5. Heard and considered. 6. On careful examination of the submissions made by both the sides, we find that the impugned order has relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Marmagoa Steel Ltd. (supra) which has been reversed by the Hon'ble Bomb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he cover of an invoice issued under Rule 52A. However, that situation does not arise in this case for the simple reasons that the importer M/s. Essar Gujarat Ltd. had loaned the goods to the assessee (which transaction is not doubted in the show-cause notice). Further the goods were transferred directly by the importer to the Unit of the assessee from the Port. Therefore, the goods never went to the manufacturing unit of M/s. Essar Gujarat Ltd. For such a situation the proviso to sub-rule (2) of Rule 57G states that the relevant document indicating payment of duty would be Bill of Entry. 11. Now in the present case, as far as Bills of Entry dated 30th May, 1994 and 31st May, 1994 are concerned, Bills of Entry were produced by the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... if the manufacturer desires he can take the CENVAT credit at the earliest opportunity when the inputs are received in the factory. This, however, does not mean, nor is it even intended that if the manufacturer does not take credit as soon as the inputs are received in the factory, he would be denied the benefit of CENVAT credit. Such an interpretation is not tenable." From the reading of the said Circular, it is clear that the intent of the legislature is that the manufacturer should not be denied the credit of the inputs procured by them within the provisions of law. Further, we find that in the case of Philips India Ltd. (supra) this Tribunal has dealt with the issue and thereafter arrived at decision which is reproduced herein as under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
