Prospective operation of Rule 9A barred compliance demand for an earlier switch-over, and the appeal succeeded.

Compliance with Rule 9A of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 could not be insisted upon for a switch-over made before the rule came into force on 25/11/2004. A condition introduced only later could not be treated as mandatory for an earlier transition, and the absence of a counter-affidavit left the appellant's factual stand unrebutted. On that basis, the demand to comply with Rule 9A was found unwarranted and the appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether compliance with Rule 9A of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 could be insisted upon for a switch-over undertaken before the rule was brought into force.

Analysis: The relevant rule had been inserted only with effect from 25/11/2004 by Notification No. 38/04-CE (N.T.). A requirement that was not in existence on the date of the assessee's switch-over could not be treated as a mandatory condition. Since no counter-affidavit was filed to dispute the appellant's stand, the demand for compliance under Rule 9A was held to be unwarranted.

Conclusion: The insistence on compliance with Rule 9A was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded.

---