9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der, confirmed the demand of Rs. 4,45,65,219/- together with interest and imposed penalty of Rs. 1,10,00,000/- on the applicants. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. We find that the only ground on which the Commissioner had denied the credit taken by the applicants is that the inputs in question were received during the period from April, 2004 to September, 2006, but the credit was taken on 30-10-2006 and 31-11-2006. The eligibility of the inputs to the Cenvat Credit, their receipt in the factory, their duty paid nature and use in or in relation to the manufacture of dutiable final product are not under dispute. The show cause notice has proceeded on the basis that in terms of Rule 4(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceived in the factory, he would be denied the credit. 5. Rule 4(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 also provides that the Cenvat credit in respect of inputs may be taken immediately on receipt of the inputs in the factory of the manufacturer or in the premises of the output service. 6. The CESTAT in the case of Philips India Ltd. v. CCE [2007 (213) E.L.T. 564 (Tri-Mumbai) = 2007 (6) S.T.R. 410 (Tri.-Mumbai)] had specifically considered the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001, which is pari materia with the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and held that in March and April 2001, the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 were in force and these Rules did not contain any time limit for taking credit. The relevant portion of this decision is as under:- "3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not mean, nor it is even intended that if the manufacturer does not take credit as soon as inputs are received in the factory he would be denied the benefit thereof". "Under the Cenvat Credit Rules, a manufacturer can take credit the minute the inputs are received in the factory. This however, does not mean, nor does it intended that if manufacturer does not take credit as soon as inputs are received in the factory he would be denied the benefit of Cenvat Credit. Such an interpretation is not tenable". Thus the Circular dated 29-8-2000 issued by the CBEC has been interpreted by the CESTAT to mean that the Cenvat Credit Rules had not prescribed any upper most time limit for the purpose of taking credit. 8. The CESTAT in the case of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... material period and therefore the credit could be taken. This was followed in the case of Tamil Nadu Petro Products Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai - 2003 (160) E.L.T. 199 (Tri.-Chennai)......" 9. The Commissioner in the impugned Order has relied upon the decision of the Single Member Bench of the CESTAT in the case of J.V. Strips v. CCE, 2007 (218) E.L.T. 252 (Tri.-Del.). However, this decision of the Tribunal is contrary to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Raghuvar (I) Ltd. reported in 2000 (118) E.L.T. 311 (S.C.) in which it has been held that when the statute does not prescribed any time-limit for any action, no time limit can be imputed into that statute from any other provision. This decision of the Supreme Court was rendere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
