Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 321 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of CENVAT Credit - Declaration for availing the credit filed late - Held that - Appellant has availed the credit on 01.04.2003 as per Notification no. 25/03 dated 01.04.2003 and declaration have been filed on 01.04.2003 and 25.05.2003. Therefore, if there is any query by the revenue and same has been replied later on does not amount that they filed declaration after the period prescribed. In these terms, I hold that appellant has filed declaration within time and they are entitled to CENVAT credit - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Appeal against denial of deemed credit availed by the appellant on 01.04.2003 due to the timing of filing the declaration for availing the credit. Analysis: The appellant, a manufacturer of processed textile fabric, availed CENVAT credit on stocks as of 01.04.2003 following Notification no. 25/03-CE(NT) dated 01.04.2003. The appellant filed declarations on 01.04.2003 and 25.05.2003 regarding the credit availed. Subsequently, when the revenue queried the timing of the declaration, the appellant responded on 07.07.2003. The revenue contended that since the declaration was filed on 07.07.2003, beyond the three-month period stipulated in the notification, the appellant was not entitled to the credit, leading to the initiation of proceedings culminating in the impugned order. Upon hearing both parties and reviewing the submissions, it was established that the appellant indeed availed the credit on 01.04.2003 in accordance with the relevant notification. The declarations were filed on 01.04.2003 and 25.05.2003, demonstrating compliance with the notification requirements. The delay in responding to the revenue's query did not invalidate the timely filing of declarations. Consequently, it was held that the appellant had met the prescribed timeline for filing the declaration and was entitled to the CENVAT credit. As a result of the above findings, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief deemed necessary. This judgment clarifies the importance of timely compliance with notification provisions for availing credits and upholds the appellant's entitlement to the CENVAT credit based on the demonstrated adherence to the prescribed procedures.
|