Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + SC Central Excise - 2022 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 580 - SC - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - removal of Cenvatted capital goods - Interpretation of statute - proviso added in 2007 to sub-rule (5) of Rule 3 to Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - clarificatory in nature or not - retrospective effect or not - whether in absence of said proviso the words “as such” appearing in sub-rule (5) of Rule 3 contemplated the removal of cenvated capital goods without use shall be the substantial question of law for adjudication in this appeal? HELD THAT:- Admittedly, the appellant had used the goods in question in its factory at Goa from 1999 to 2004. As such, the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Rule 57-S(2)(b) of 1944 Rules. It appears that though the said proviso to sub-rule (5) of Rule 3 existed in the 2002 Rules, by a legislature slip, it was not included in the 2004 Rules. As such, to clarify the position, an amendment was carried out in 2007 to bring it in tune with Rule 57-S(2)(b) of the 1944 Rules. Having held the 2007 amendment to be clarificatory, the effect would be that the said proviso existed in the statute book from 2004 itself. This being the position, the appellant was entitled to take benefit of the said proviso and make an adjustment as per the said proviso. The question of law as framed by the High Court is held in favour of the appellant. The demand issued by the revenue is quashed and set aside - Appeal allowed.
|