9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions of other Rules will have to be followed and the only relaxation given is with respect to availment of credit in transition from manufacture of exempted goods to manufacture of dutiable goods - thus, even the transitional credit will be subjected to the provisions of Rule 4 (1) of CCR, 2004. Time limitation - HELD THAT:-It is abundantly clear that the appellants have put the department to notice vide their letter dated 29.04.2016 and ER-1 Returns. Therefore, it was not open for the department to issue SCN dated 27.06.2019 after the lapse of more than two years there too alleging suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty etc. We find that there is not even an iota of truth in the allegation of the department as per the records of the case. Moreover, looking into the fact that the appellants are a company under the Ministry of Defence intention to evade payment of duty cannot be alleged - under the facts and circumstances of the case, even any other company could not have been charged with suppression of facts with an intention to evade payment of duty. The appellants have though not made out a case on merits of the issue, have certainly made out a strong case in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to be exempted; this provision has been brought into the statute with the intention that the inputs lying in stock would be used for manufacture of final products that will be cleared on payment of duty. He submits that the provision of Rule 3 (2) of CCR, 2004 has a Non-obstante clause and thus takes precedence over other rules; once the provisions of Rule 4 (1) are not applicable for availment of credit under Rule 3 (2), the proviso to Rule 4 (1) is also not applicable. Learned Counsel further submits that wherever the legislature intended to cast the time limit in allowing transitional credit, it is then specifically. He submits that Section 140 (3) of the CGST Act, which allows availment of transitional credit in respect of the erstwhile duties paid on inputs lying in stock, contained in work in progress and in finished goods, which was not entitled under the legacy laws, but entitled under GST law allows such credit only in respect of the purchases made prior to one year from 01.07.2017. He submits that Rule 3 (2) of CCR, 2004, did not prescribe any time limit. The time limit prescribed by way of proviso under Rule 4 (1) would apply to only in cases where the credit has to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustrial Cables Vs. CCE 2009 (236) ELT 658 P & H 13 Global Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE 2019 (26) GSTL 470 Del. 14 Bridal Jewellery Mfg. Co. Vs. CCE, Noida 2018 (10) GSTL 70 (Tri.-All.) 15 Uni cast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Meerut 2016 (331)ELT 369 (All.) 16 Global Sugar Ltd. Vs. CCE Kanpur 2016 (334) ELT 604 (All.) 17 CGST Vs. Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation 2018 (28) GSTL 225 Tri.-Chen. 18 TNSTC Vs. CCE & ST 2019 (28) GSTL 225 Tri.-Chen. 19 UOI Vs. Rajasthan Spinning & Weaving Mills 2009 (238) ELT 3 SC 20 Sanghvi Marmo Pvt. Ltd. 2020 (33) GSTL 232 Tri-Del. 21 Neon News Pvt. Ltd. 2019 (26) GSTL 241 Tri.-All. 22 Ripple Fragrances Exports Pvt. Ltd. 2018 (363) ELT 1062 Tri.-Bang 23 CCE, Hyderabad IV Vs. National Remote Sensing Agency 2021-TIOL-1343-HC-Telangana-ST 3. Learned AR for the department reiterated the findings of the Order-in-Original. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 5.1 Brief issue that requires consideration in the instant case is that as to whether the appellants are entitled for credit on inputs lying in stock, work in progress and finished goods as on the date of rescinding of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the only relaxation given is with respect to availment of credit in transition from manufacture of exempted goods to manufacture of dutiable goods. We find that Learned Commissioner has rightly observed, in the impugned order, that "4.5.3. Now taking into consideration the arguments of the assesse with regard to applicability of proviso to Rule 4 (1), I intend to take upon the contextual legal meaning of "Proviso‟. A proviso is a clause which is added to the statute to accept something from enacting clause or to limit its applicability. As such, the function of a proviso is to qualify something or to exclude, something from what is provided in the enactment which, but for proviso, would be within the purview of enactment. A proviso may entirely change the very concept of the intendment of the enactment by insisting on certain mandatory conditions to be fulfilled in order to make the enactment workable and thus acquire the tenor and colour of the substantive enactment itself." Therefore, we are of the concerned opinion that even the transitional credit will be subjected to the provisions of Rule 4 (1) of CCR, 2004. As the position of law is crystal clear, reference to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
