TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 9-7-04 with effect from 1-12-04. The appellants received certain capital goods in the month of March, 2005 and took 50% of the duty paid on the capital goods as first instalment of credit amounting to Rs. 2,67,944/- in March, 2005 itself and subsequently they took the balance of credit in April, 2005. The Department held that inasmuch as the goods manufactured by them were exempted under Notification No. 30/04, at the time of receipt of capital goods, they were not eligible for taking Cenvat credit in view of Rule 6(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and accordingly, the original authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 2,67,944/- along with interest and imposed equal amount as penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted cotton knitted fabrics were eligible, inasmuch as, the said machineries were later used for dutiable man-made fabrics and yarn. He also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of BPL Display Devices Ltd. v. CCE, Ghaziabad reported in [2004 (174) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.)]. 5. Learned DR submits that the eligibility of credit on capital goods has to be determined under Rule 6(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and the relevant date for determining the eligibility is the date of receipt of the capital goods. In this case, in March, 2005, the appellant has availed full exemption in respect of goods cleared by them under Notification No. 30/04 and therefore, they were not eligible to take credit on the capital goods. He submits that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d goods can be used only later on in the manufacture of the goods specified in the said notification. The present case is totally on a different footing. It involves the interpretation as to the relevant date for the purpose of allowing the benefit of credit under Rule 6(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules. It is not being disputed that the appellant has not paid any duty on the goods cleared by them during March, 2005, when the capital goods were received. They were availing full exemption under Notification No. 30/04. The submission that, in the subsequent financial year, they were to avail exemption under Notification No. 29/04 cannot change the relevant date for determining the eligibility of Cenvat credit on the capital goods. As already mention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
