TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 943X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... into the law a time limit of one year from the date of receipt of inputs for taking of the credit. Inasmuch as the appellant has not done this, the denial of Cenvat credit cannot be faulted. Secondly, it is noted that the appellant was availing the benefit of Notification No. 6/2002 wherein the final products manufactured by the appellant was cleared without payment of duty up to a quantity of 3500 MT. To be eligible for the credit, the final products should be dutiable. The denial of credit to the extent of ₹ 9,63,922/- has been made on the ground that the credit pertains to inputs which have gone into the manufacture of exempted final products. Therefore, the denial of credit, in these circumstances, by the lower authorities ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the adjudicating authority has disallowed Cenvat credit of ₹ 9,63,922/- and also imposed equivalent amount of penalty on the ground that this amount of credit pertains to inputs used in the manufacture of exempted final products. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before me. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that M/s. Shayona Pulp Conversion Mills Pvt. Ltd. is a manufacturer of kraft paper. During the period 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03 the appellant availed excise duty exemption on the kraft paper manufactured by them vide Notification No. 6/2002, dated 1-3-2002 up to a quantity of 3500 MT. During the said period they did not avail any Cenvat credit of the duty paid on various inputs. However, they took Cenv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by both the sides. As per the Cenvat Credit Rules credit of the duty paid on inputs/input services has to be taken immediately on receipt of the input/input services. Though the rule does not lay down any time limit, it is a settled position in law that a reasonable time limit has to be read into the law. In Central Excise matters, the normal period of limitation, both for demand of duty and also for claiming of refund is one year. Therefore, it is reasonable to read into the law a time limit of one year from the date of receipt of inputs for taking of the credit. Inasmuch as the appellant has not done this, the denial of Cenvat credit cannot be faulted. Secondly, it is noted that the appellant was availing the benefit of Notification No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
