Deemed transitional credit cannot be denied for incomplete stock disclosure or goods outside premises where purchase is established.

Deemed transitional credit on inputs could not be denied merely because the stock was not fully declared in the first declaration, the goods were stated to be lying outside the registered premises, or the transporter's particulars were not disclosed, where purchase by the manufacturer was otherwise established. The claim was examined under Rule 9(A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2003, Notification No. 35/2004-C.E. (N.T.) and the relevant Board circulars, and additional declarations filed within the permitted time supported the assessee's case. The rejection of credit was therefore required to be reconsidered, and the impugned orders were set aside with remand to the Original Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to deemed transitional credit on inputs when the stock was not fully declared in the first declaration and some goods were stated to be lying outside the registered premises.

Analysis: The credit claim was examined in the light of sub-rule 3 of Rule 9(A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2003, Notification No. 35/2004-C.E. (N.T.), and the relevant Board circulars. The materials on record indicated that additional declarations had been filed within the time permitted by the circulars. The settled position applied was that deemed credit could not be denied merely because the goods were lying at a place other than the registered premises or because the transporter's particulars were not disclosed, so long as purchase of the goods by the manufacturer was established. On that basis, the rejection of credit required reconsideration.

Conclusion: The appellant's claim was not finally rejected; the impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration.

---