Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (9) TMI 125

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aspect as to whether the iron and steel articles were used for construction or as supporting structurals, we are of the view that the same would be entitled to credit inasmuch as the period in the present appeal is before 7.7.2009. Period of limitation - demand - Held that:- the lower authorities have invoked the extended period only on the sole ground that the appellant was aware of the fact that the credit is not admissible and still, they took the credit. We find no appreciable reasons for observing so. Admittedly, the credit was being availed after reflecting the inputs in the statutory RG-23-D Part I and Part-II records. The fact of availment of credit was also being reflected in the statutory returns being filed with the Revenue. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pporting structurals and the definition of Inputs in the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was amended w.e.f. 7.7.2009 ousting such goods from the eligibility of the cenvat credit. Inasmuch as the period is prior to 7.7.2009, they would be entitled to the benefit of the credit. The appellant also challenged the credit on the point of limitation inasmuch as the credit was availed after reflecting the same in the cenvat credit records and there was no suppression or mis-statement on the part of the assessee, with any malafide intention. They referred to and relied upon the various decisions allowing the cenvat credit in respect of such iron and steel items. 3. However, the above pleas of the appellant was not accepted by the lower author .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oked the extended period only on the sole ground that the appellant was aware of the fact that the credit is not admissible and still, they took the credit. We find no appreciable reasons for observing so. Admittedly, the credit was being availed after reflecting the inputs in the statutory RG-23-D Part I and Part-II records. The fact of availment of credit was also being reflected in the statutory returns being filed with the Revenue. Non-disclosure of a fact for which there is no column in the records or in the returns, does not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that such non-disclosure is with malafide intention, especially, when there is no legal obligation on the part of the assessee to disclose a particular fact. Apart from that, w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates