9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1517X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it was introduced for the first time only with effect from 1 September 2004. Also, the Sugar Cess credit from September 2014 onwards was taken by the Appellant on a month to month basis prior to its reversal in February 2016 on being objected by the revenue while reserving the right to recredit. Therefore, it was a case of recredit and we agree with the Appellant s that no time limit could be imputed for taking recredit of the amount so reversed under protest. Moreover, the views expressed by the original authority as regards non-applicability of Circular dated 19 November 2014 is erroneous and unsustainable as the circular speaks about recredit in general and the situations which have been mentioned therein are only illustrative in nature. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant in the ER-1 return for the month of June 2017 on two grounds. Firstly, Sugar Cess is not expressly stipulated as a levy on which credit can be taken under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Secondly, it was alleged that such credit has been taken on the strength of invoices which were issued more than one year prior to the date of taking the credit in violation of the proviso to Rule 4 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The demand proposed in the Notice was confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority vide the impugned Order-in-Original on both the grounds. 2.3 The authorized representative for the Appellant has assailed the Order-in-Original on both the counts. The Learned A/R refers to the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court ren ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvice Tax and Customs, Bangalore-II Para 4 The Learned AR vehemently argued that the decision relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority are distinguishable on facts as those were dealing with the issue of levy of Education Cess on various products specific Cesses imposed under different enactments but not with the eligibility of Cenvat Credit on Sugar Cess. 3. The Learned DR justifies the impugned order. 4. Heard both sides and perused the case records. We find that the substantial question of law considered by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in Renuka Sugar case is set out at para 6 thereof. "Whether the assessee is entitled for Cenvat credit, on the Sugar Cess under Section 3(4) of the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 as the same is not one of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the revenue authorities whereas the time limit for the purposes of taking credit was introduced for the first time only with effect from 1 September 2004. We also find that the Sugar Cess credit from September 2014 onwards was taken by the Appellant on a month to month basis prior to its reversal in February 2016 on being objected by the revenue while reserving the right to recredit. Therefore, it was a case of recredit and we agree with the Appellant's that no time limit could be imputed for taking recredit of the amount so reversed under protest. Moreover, the views expressed by the original authority as regards non-applicability of Circular dated 19 November 2014 is erroneous and unsustainable as the circular speaks about recredit in gen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
