TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld to be clarificatory amendment and as such, would be applicable only prospectively, we are of the view that the same would be entitled to credit inasmuch as the period in the present appeal is before 07.07.2009. Invokation of extended period of limitation - Demand - show cause notice stands issued on 30/09/2008, for the period, September, 2007 to December, 2007 - Held that:- the credit was being availed after reflecting the inputs in the statutory RG-23 D Part-I and Part-II records. The fact of availment of credit was also being reflected in the statutory returns being filed with the Revenue. Non-disclosure of a fact for which there is no column in the records or in the returns, does not ipso facto lead to the conclusion that such non- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Mishra, DR for the respondent ORDER Per Archana Wadhwa After hearing both the sides duly represented by Shri L.P. Asthana and Ms. Shreya Dahiya, Advocates for the appellant and Shri R.K. Mishra, DR for the respondent, we find that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Sponge Iron falling under Chapter 72 of the First Schedule of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants availed CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on Bars, Angles, Channels, Joists. HR Coils, Beams, Rails, Plates, G.C. Sheets etc besides availing credit on cement, the welding electrodes, Oxygen Gas, LPG Gas etc. 2. Revenue by entertaining a view that the said items used by the appellant are not Modvatable raised demand of duty against them by way ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... structurals, they would not be eligible as modvatable items inasmuch as the amendment which came into force on 07.07.2009 was only a clarificatory amendment and as such, is to be held as retrospective. However, we find that the said decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal was considered by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Mundra Ports Special Economic Zone Ltd.- 2015 (04) LCX0197 and stands virtually over-ruled. Inasmuch as the Hon ble High Court observed that the amendment issued on 07.07.2009 cannot be held to be clarificatory amendment and as such, would be applicable only prospectively. As such, without going into the factual aspect as to whether the iron and steel articles were used for construction or as supporting ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee and the law was reversed only subsequently, by a Larger Bench or by any other decision, no malafide can be attributed to the assessee and longer limitation period would not be available to the Revenue. 6. As regards the welding electrodes and Oxygen Gas etc, we find that he issue again is no more res-integra and stand decided by various High Courts. One such refercne can be made to Chhattisgarh High Court in the case of Ambuja Cements Eastern Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur 2010 (256) ELT 690 Chhattisgarh wherein welding electrodes used for repair and maintenance purpose were also held to be cenvatable. Similarly, in the case of Hindustan Zinc Limted Vs. Union of India 2008 (228) ELT 517 (Raj.), the Hon ble High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
