9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n introduced vide Notification No. 21/2014-C.E. (N.T.), dated 11-7-2014 w.e.f. 1-9-2014? - HELD THAT:- The said proviso have been introduced w.e.f. 1-9-2014 and there is no stipulation in the amending notification that the same shall apply retrospectively. Rules of interpretation provide that whenever any statute is newly added the same has got only prospective effect unless it is specifically pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2014, whether the same is not permissible under proviso to Rule 4(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, which have been introduced vide Notification No. 21/2014-C.E. (N.T.), dated 11-7-2014 w.e.f. 1-9-2014. 2. Brief facts are that the appellant is purchaser/importer of marble block from indigenous suppliers who manufacture marble slab and tiles. The appellant was availing SSI exemption under Notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 20-1-2015 with respect to B.E. dated 22-5-2014, under the 3rd proviso to Rule 4(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The show cause notice was adjudicated on contest and the Cenvat credit in question was disallowed. Further, demanded interest, and penalty of ₹ 10,000/- was imposed under Rule 15A of the Act. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hold that the said proviso in Rule 4(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules has got only prospective effect. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and it is held that the appellant has taken credit rightly on 20-1-2015 on the basis of Bill of Entry dated 22-5-2014. Appeal is allowed and the appellant is entitled to consequential benefits, in accordance with law. (Dictated and pronounced in open Court) - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
