TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 818X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal adjudicating authority, Departmental appeal dismissed. - VSK/1-2/M-V/2010 - - - Dated:- 15-1-2010 - Shri V.S. Krishnan S/Shri Bharat Raichandani and Satyanarayan Gajule, Manager (F A), for the Assessee. [Order]. This is a set of two appeals filed by M/s. Tata Steel Limited Western Express High Way, Dattapara Road, Borivali, Mumbai, (hereinafter referred to as the appellants) and the Department against the cited orders of the original adjudicating authority. 2. To briefly recount the facts, the appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Alloy Steel/Non-Alloy Steel, Steel Wires, Galvanized Wires, Standard Wired falling under Chapter 72 and 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants availed Cenva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of excise duty on final products or service tax on any input service; further Rule 4 lays down the conditions of availing credit of duty paid on inputs and capital goods as well as credit of service tax paid on input services; (ii) the appellants submitted that the original adjudicating authority had held that the credit of service tax paid on input services should be taken immediately in terms of Rule 4(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004; the said term immediately would mean within a reasonable period of time; the reasonable period for the purpose of availing credit of service tax paid on input was one year. Therefore the finding of the original adjudicating authority was erroneous and contrary to law; (iii) the appellants su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellants) appeared before me for a personal hearing on 14th January, 2010 at 12.30 hours. 6. It was submitted that the issue here related to availment of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on input services by the appellant. It was submitted that the original adjudicating authority had sought to deny such credit on the grounds that the credit was taken only after one year after the date of availment of the services. The original adjudicating authority had taken this view based on reading of Rule 4(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant pointed out that first of all the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 do not provide for any time limit for availment of Cenvat credit but even if for a moment it is accepted without conceding that it must be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 11AC of the Central Excise Act would not be imposable. Findings 10. I have gone through the facts of the case including the oral and written submissions made. 11. This is an issue relating to availment of Cenvat Credit by the appellant after a period of one year. The original adjudicating authority had denied the Cenvat Credit on the input services on the grounds that they were not availed immediately as required by the Rule 4(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. I have carefully gone through the scheme of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and I find that the said Rule does not stipulate any time period for availment of Cenvat Credit. The appellant have rightly argued that in the case of input services, Rule 4(7) of the Cenvat Cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
