Transitional input credit and amended time limits under Rule 57G applied prospectively, not retrospectively, for earlier-period claims.

Transitional input-credit under Rule 57H was available where the declaration under Rule 57G was filed within time and the assessee awaited departmental approval, since the scheme contemplated both timely declaration and departmental allowance. A later six-month restriction introduced in Rule 57G did not apply retrospectively to credit relating to the earlier period governed by the prior regime. Credit for the pre-amendment period was therefore admissible without the six-month limit, while credit taken for the post-amendment period remained subject to the amended time bar and was not admissible if taken beyond six months.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether credit under the transitional provision was admissible where the declaration under Rule 57G was filed within time and the assessee awaited departmental approval; (ii) Whether the six-month time limit introduced in Rule 57G could be applied to credit relating to the period prior to its introduction.

Issue (i): Whether credit under the transitional provision was admissible where the declaration under Rule 57G was filed within time and the assessee awaited departmental approval.

Analysis: The transitional scheme under Rule 57H allowed credit on inputs lying in stock or received on or after the relevant date, subject to filing of a declaration under Rule 57G by the prescribed time. The record showed that the declaration requirement was satisfied within the stipulated period. The scheme also contemplated departmental allowance of the credit, so the assessee could not be faulted for awaiting the jurisdictional officer's approval.

Conclusion: The denial of credit on this count was not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the six-month time limit introduced in Rule 57G could be applied to credit relating to the period prior to its introduction.

Analysis: The six-month restriction applied only from the date the amended Rule 57G came into force. The later amendment could not govern credits relating to the earlier period. For documents pertaining to the period before the amendment, the credit was allowable without reference to the six-month limit. For the later period, the limitation applied and credit taken beyond six months was not admissible.

Conclusion: The denial was set aside for the pre-amendment period and sustained for the post-amendment period.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in part, with credit allowed for the transitional and pre-amendment period and disallowed for the later period where the statutory time limit was breached.

Ratio Decidendi: A subsequently introduced limitation on availing input credit cannot be applied retrospectively to deny credit for an earlier period governed by a prior regime, while credits for the later period remain subject to the amended time limit.

---