9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Revenue has challenged those orders before the Commissioner (Appeals) who held that as the appellant did not file statement till 15th day of the subsequent month, therefore, they are not entitled to take self credit which was irregular and consequently self credit was disallowed. There are other appeals which were filed by the appellants wherein self credit sought to be denied on the consequence of self credit denied by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. The appellant is located in the State of Jammu & Kashmir and availing exemption under Notification No.01/2010-CE dated 6.2.2010 and complied with the conditions of the said Notification. Further as per the condition 5(d) of the said Notification, the appellant is required to submit a statement of total duty payable and as well as duty paid by utilization of credit or otherwise by 15th day of subsequent month. The Commissioner (Appeals) has denied the benefit of the Notification. Against those orders, the appellants are before us. 4. Ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that the sole ground to deny self credit to the appellant by the Commissioner (Appeals) is that the substantive condition of 5(d) of the Notification is required t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the duty paid by utilization of CENVAT credit or otherwise and the credit taken as per clause (a), on each category of goods manufactured and cleared under the notification and specified in the said Table, to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, by the 15th day of the month in which the credit has been so taken; (e) the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, after such verification, as may be deemed necessary, shall determine the amount correctly refundable to the manufacturer and intimate to the manufacturer by the 15th day of the next month to the month in which the statement under clause (d) has been submitted. In case the credit taken by the manufacturer is in excess of the amount determined, the manufacturer shall, within five days from the receipt of the intimation, reverse the said excess credit from the account current maintained by him. In case, the credit taken by the manufacturer is less than the amount of refund determined, the manufacturer shall be eligible to take credit of the balance amount; (f) in case the manufacturer fail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2(a) of the Notification in question, which requires them to submit a statement of the duty paid from account current to the Asst. Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, by the 7th of the next month in which the duty has been paid from account current, the benefit cannot be extended to them. The Commissioner (Appeals) has observed in her impugned order that all the other conditions as regards the eligibility of the respondents to claim the benefit of Notification are fulfilled and the said conditions as contained in 2(a) of the Notification being only procedural condition, the benefit of the Notification cannot be denied to the respondents. 4. After giving . our careful consideration to the issue involved we find that there is no dispute as regards the eligibility of the respondents to the benefit of the Notification in question. The Revenue s only objection is that the statement showing payment of duty from the account current has been filed by the respondents to the proper officer by the 7th of the next month. It is well settled law that non-following of procedural requirement cannot deny the substantive benefit, otherwise available to the assessee. It is on reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d against the subject but once ambiguity or doubt about applicability is lifted and the subject falls in the notification then full play should be given to it and it calls for a wider and liberal construction" 12. We also take note of the fact that in all the above case, similar issue was examined by the adjudicating authority in the case of M/s. Aroma Hightech Limited vide Order dated 7.2.2013 (supra) wherein it has been observed in as under: 3.1 During the CERA audit, vide para 1 of LAR No.1823/2007 2008 dated: 04.01.2008, it was observed that as per Para 2C(d) of the said Notification the Noticee was required to submit a statement of the duty paid, other than by way of utilization o Cenvat Credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002, along with the refund amount by 7th day of the next month to the month under consideration. 3.3. Since the Noticee has failed to submit the statement, as required under Para 2C(d) of the Notification, within the stipulated time limit, therefore, the credit of the duty of Rs. 2,32,12,642/- taken/utilized by the Noticee appeared to be irregular. 3.4 As the objection was not admitted by the department, the Para No.1 of the Local Audit Report No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29.02.2012 informed the Ministry that the Ministry s ATN on Audit Para No.3.1 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India for the year ended March, 2007 has been vetted with no comments. The copy of the said comments was forwarded by Assistant Commissioner (PAC) vide his letter F.No.232/290/2008-CX.7 dated 12.03.2012." 13. As the said issue has been examined by several authorities including the Apex Court wherein it has been held that condition 5(d) of Notification No.01/2010-CE dated 6.2.2010 is similar to other notifications which are in the manner of procedure to be followed by the appellant wherein the appellant is required to file certain documents before a particular date. If such documents are filed with a delay, in that circumstance, it is only a procedural lapse on the part of the appellant, the benefit of notification cannot be to the appellant. 14. In view of above observations, we hold that condition 5 (d) of Notification No.01/2010-CE dated 6.2.2010 is procedural in nature and for complying with the said condition with a delay cannot be fatal to the appellant. In that circumstance, the self credit taken by the appellant cannot be denied. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
