2020 (5) TMI 95

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... i Sharad Airan, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Respondent ORDER RAMESH NAIR : The brief facts of the case are that the appellant are engaged in the manufacture of textile articles. They are availing exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004 for the period 2012-13 to November 2016. During this period they were availing Cenvat credit on capital goods. The case of the depar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the appellant, for the period 2012-13 to November 2016, he fairly concedes that Cenvat credit of Rs. 34,060/- is pertaining to the period up to 2014-15, which is before the start of two years, as prescribed in Rule 6(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, therefore, he is not contesting the dis-allowance of credit of Rs. 34,060/-. 3. As regards Cenvat credit availed on capital goods for the period 2015-1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cord. We find that lower authorities have denied Cenvat credit on capital goods on the ground that the amendment to Rule 6(4) does not have retrospective effect. We find that, as per the submissions made by Appellant before the Adjudicating Authority, they have paid duty in the month of April 2017 and June 2017. The Adjudicating Authority has decided on the interpretation of amendment and no verif .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X