9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acturing of final product and same product has been cleared in the month of April itself, is the contention of the Ld. AR is accepted then the Cenvat Credit is not available for payment of duty by the assessee. This is not the scheme of the Government for availment of Cenvat Credit. Therefore, the argument is not acceptable. Further, I find that the issue whether the Cenvat Credit lying unutilized as on 22.07.1996 when the Vanaspati Oil was exempted from duty can be utilized for the payment of duty on Vanaspati Oil in the month of May 2004 when the duty was introduced is entitled or not, has examined by the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Rasoi Ltd.[2004 (6) TMI 46 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA] in positive manner. Also the facts o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 999/-. Same was intimated to the department in June 2004. In October 2004, the appellant realized that they have taken Cenvat Credit of ₹ 15,34,773/- without having relevant documents in their custody, they suo moto reversed the credit. Thereafter, in June 2005, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant to deny the utilization of Cenvat Credit lying unutilized in their Cenvat Credit account as on 23.07.1996 for the clearance of May 2004. In these set of facts, the Show Cause Notice was issued. Same was adjudicated demanding duty of ₹ 38,86,999/- along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty. The amount of ₹ 15,34,773/- which was reversed by the appellant in the month of October 2004 was appropriated on appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... examined by the Ld. Commissioner (A). Therefore, case law relied upon by the Ld. Counsel are not relevant to the facts of this case. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. In this case the appellant has utilized Cenvat Credit lying unutilized in their Cenvat Credit account as on 22.07.1996 for the clearance of May 2004. The contention of the Ld. AR is that in the clearance of May 2004 the inputs were not same which was used in clearance of May 2004. Therefore, Cenvat Credit cannot be utilized is not acceptable at all as if anybody has procured input for say in the month of April and availed Cenvat Credit thereon. Thereafter, the said inputs are lying in their factory but inputs which were procured in the month of March h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Apex Court has unhesitatingly preserved such accrued right. 13. That the petitioner no.1 had acquired money-credit to the extent of ₹ 7,32,78,689/- in terms of the notification under the money-credit scheme. Such money credit scheme permitted the petitioner no.1 to utilise such credit for an amount not exceeding ₹ 1000/- per MT at any time after the succeeding month in which the money-credit accrued. Thus, the petitioner no.1 is entitled to invoke such vested right in accordance with the conditions mentioned in the notification as it then stood. The aforesaid point is, thus, answered in favour of the petitioner no.1 7. The SLP filed against the said order by the revenue has also been dismissed by the Hon ble Apex Court. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
