9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 364X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacturers of candles, fragrance oil, agarbathis etc., and registered under Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to a CEA), for payment of Central Excise Duty. Prior to August 2014 they were registered as EOU and they were availing cenvat credit on the inputs, capital goods and input services. During July 2014, they opted out of EOU scheme and converted into DTA unit (hereinafter referred to as DTAU ). During the scrutiny of ER-1 returns for the month of August 2014, it was noticed that they have declared opening balance of Rs. 13,03,176/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Three Thousand One Hundred and Seventy Six only) which is carried forward from the ER-2 returns filed for the month of July 2014 when they were operating as EOU. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 11.07.2014. Aggrieved by the said impugned order, assessee has filed the present appeal. 2. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has travelled beyond the show-cause notice and has raised completely new grounds for denying credit. He further submitted that the Notification 21/2014 dated 11.07.2014 is only effective for invoices raised post September 2014 wherein in the present case the duty paid at the time of debonding and the duty of availment of credit was prior to September 2014 and therefore, the said Notification will not apply to the appellant. He further submitted that from August 2014 the unit started functi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the period of 6 months. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the credit of duty paid on debonded goods was availed after a period of 6 months from the date of payment of duty and the date of bill of entry and therefore, the same is ineligible in terms of Notification 21/2014 dated 11.07.2014 issued to amend the Rule 4(1) and 4(7) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Though the Commissioner has allowed transfer of unutilized cenvat credit from the EOU to the DTA unit of the appellant by relying upon the decision of Tecumseh Products cited supra. Further I find that the Notification 21/2014 dated 11.07.2014 became effective for invoices raised post September 2014 and in the present case credit was availed prior to September 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
