TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 742X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t if such one-time credit is not allowed as envisaged in scheme of transforming ‘deemed basis’ into ‘actual basis’, it will cause injustice to the appellant in the facts of the case at the transformation stage itself when the appellant has also paid actual duty while processing inputs on which appellant had taken only credit and also reversed credit. These are the clinching evidences in favour of the appellant apart from the facts of this case, CBEC Circulars, press note and decisions relied upon by the appellant - the revenue has not discharged their burden to prove that the fabrics in question declared as of 31-03-2003 were in fact pertained to period after 01-04-2003 onwards - Revenue has not produced any evidences to prove that the input fabrics were received only after 01-04-2003 - Had it been so, then such fabrics would have been under the cover of duty paying documents. Documents submitted beyond the time limit – Held that:- The appellant’s declaration dt. 13-06-2003 received in the department on 16-03-2003 involving credit - In fact 15-06-2003 was Sunday and declaration dt. 13-06-2003 which was received on 16-03-2003 can be accepted as valid declaration made for clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was filed by the appellants rejected their appeal except reduction in penalty. Hence, this appeal. 5. Shri P.P. Jadeja arguing on behalf of the appellant contended that they were eligible for the one time transitional credit allowed under Rule 9A of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2002; that there were confusions in availing scheme; that appellant was under bonafide belief that they could have declared only stock of fabrics lying in the factory on 31-03-2003; that after clarifications issued by CBEC that in the cases the declared stock as on 31-3-2003 is kept in place other than the registered premises, intimating address of premise or premises where such stock is kept, can also be declared by the assessee in the stock declaration and extending time limit for filling declarations from time to time upto 15-06-2003, they had filed required declarations dated 23.5.2003, 13.6.2003 and 13-06-2003 received in the excise department on 16.6.2003 declaring their stock as on 31-03-2003 lying in their other grey godown premises or in transit; that the only reasons for issuing SCN were (1) declarations dated 23.5.2003, 13.6.2003 and 13-06-2003 received in department on 16.6.2003 were not proper as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decisions, CBEC Circulars and Notifications relevant for the issue in reference. (vi) CBEC Circular No. 703/19/2003-CX, dated 25-3-2003 with Press Note 6. The appellant has relied upon the following decision:- * CBEC Circular No. 714/30/2003-CX., dated 14-5-2003 * 2010 (262) E.L.T. 524 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - OMKAR TRADERS * 2009 (233) E.L.T. 395 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - KRISHNA SCREEN ART * 2008 (232) E.L.T. 807 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - V.V. PRINTS * 2008 (230) E.L.T. 493 (Tri. - Ahmd.)- L.B. TEXTILES * 2007 (219) E.L.T. 566 (Tri. - Mumbai) - USHA FASHIONS PVT. LTD. * 2007 (217) E.L.T. 549 (Tri. - Mumbai)- Shree Ram Textiles Processing Mills (I) Pvt. Ltd. * 2007 (216) E.L.T. 694 (Tri. - Ahmd.)- ELECON FABRICS * 2009 (243) E.L.T. 751 (Tri. - Ahmd.)- JALDARSHAN TEXTILE 7. On the other hand, Shri S.K. Mall, SDR reiterated findings in the impugned Order and submitted that appellant has filed multiple declarations after 01-04-2003 and claimed additional credit which is also not envisaged, that the appellant has also filed declaration on 13-06-2003, wherein they should have declared entire remaining stock, if any; that the maximum limit was extended upto 15-06-2003, but appellant s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15-6-2003. The above CBEC Circular No. 703/19/2003-CX, dated 25-3-2003 has also given clear directions to departmental officers in Para (B)(c) as under:- The officers may be instructed not to visit the premises of the new assessees, to verify the stock or premises (except in respect of traders), unless there is a specific intelligence. Such verification, if any, will be done only with the approval of the jurisdictional Additional/Joint Commissioner, who will record the reasons for such verification in writing. So long as the assessee keeps the records of production, clearance, particulars of receipt of inputs and pays the applicable duty, all procedural lapses, if any, should be ignored. Till further instructions, no audit or preventive checks would be carried out without specific intelligence and prior approval of Commissioner. 10. Thus, the Government of India intended that so long as the assessee keeps the records of production, clearance, particulars of receipt of inputs and pays the applicable duty, all procedural lapses, if any, should be ignored. 11. The appellant filed declaration for their stock as on 31-03-2003 for stock lying in their factory. Ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es to prove that the input fabrics were received only after 01-04-2003. Had it been so, then such fabrics would have been under the cover of duty paying documents only, as per the revised provisions applied to the textile Budget in 2003 w.e.f. 01-04-2003. 12. The appellants declaration dt. 13-06-2003 received in the department on 16-03-2003 involving credit of Rs. 86,167/- is objected by revenue as submitted beyond the prescribed time limit i.e. 15.6.2003. However, in fact 15-06-2003 was Sunday and declaration dt. 13-06-2003 which was received on 16-03-2003 can be accepted as valid declaration made for claiming onetime credit to the extent of Rs. 86,167/-, in terms of Section 4 of the Limitation Act 1963, which provides that When the prescribed period for any suit, appeal or application expires on a day when the court is closed, the suit, appeal or application may be instituted, preferred or made on the day when the court reopens. 13. It is also seen from the decisions relied upon by the appellant that out of 8 such cases, 6 were decided by this Bench and in all such cases appeals filed were allowed in favour of the trade. Therefore, I have no hesitation in following ratio o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
