Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 593 - AT - Central ExciseRestoration of credit - The refund claim was rejected as the credit was not within the entitlement of the appellant for having been availed long after the receipt of the inputs within the factory of appellant - Held that: - The Rules do not prescribe any outer limit for availment but they do insist upon taking of credit on inputs only after receipt in factory, i.e. it cannot be availed on the strength of a paper trail but on physical arrival at the factory. As long as that condition has been fulfilled, there can be no cavil on availment. ‘Capital goods’ must similarly be received and the full credit was not to be availed in the first year; to the extent that appellant has not availed of the credit in the first year, there can be no cavil again on lumpsum availment beyond the first year. Reliance placed in the case of COROMANDEL FERTILIZERS LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX. (A), VISAKHAPATNAM-IV [2008 (8) TMI 333 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], where it was held that there was sufficient reasons for the appellants for not taking credit during the relevant period in view of the Uncertainty in the matter. When the law is settled on the issue, there is no justification to deny the credit on the ground that it is availed after a long time. Appeal is allowed by restoring of credit - decided in favor of appellant.
|