TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uirement of law - there is no justification for denial of credit - credit allowed. Whether the demand is barred by limitation? - Held that:- The entire credit was availed by the appellant by reflecting the same in their Cenvat credit records. As such, there cannot be held to be any suppression or misstatement on their part with a malafide intention so as to invoke the longer period of limitation - the demand having been raised beyond the normal period of limitation is barred. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/70551/2018-EX[SM] - FINAL ORDER NO- 72484 / 2018 - Dated:- 25-10-2018 - Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Shri Rajesh Chhibber, Advocate for Appellant Shri Pawan Kumar Singh, Supdt (AR), for R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ices in question were issued either in the year 2013 or in the first half of year 2014, the same would not be covered by such restriction created w.e.f. 01.09.2014, inasmuch as, the notification cannot be held to be retrospective. As regards the availment of credit in respect of capital goods, they contended that no such restriction was introduced for availing the credit in respect of capital goods and in any case the credit in question was the balance 50% of the credit to be availed in the subsequent financial year. The demand was also assailed on the point of limitation. 4. The above pleas of the appellant do not stand accepted by the Lower authorities and hence the present appeal. I have heard learned Advocate Shri Rajech Chhibber app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt from holding the merits in favour of the appellant, I also find that the demand is barred by limitation. The entire credit was availed by the appellant by reflecting the same in their Cenvat credit records. As such, there cannot be held to be any suppression or misstatement on their part with a malafide intention so as to invoke the longer period of limitation. The revenue has not produced any evidence to show that such availment was with the guilty mind. As such, I find that the demand having been raised beyond the normal period of limitation is barred. 8. In view of the forgoing, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the appellant. (Pronounced in Court on-25/10/2018) - - TaxTMI - T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
