Trading activity exempted from 01/04/2011, not retrospectively applied to disputed period. Department's appeal dismissed.

The Tribunal upheld the decision that trading activity was deemed exempted only from 01/04/2011 and not for the disputed period. As the amendment to the Cenvat Credit Rules was not retrospective, the Department's appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues:
Department's appeal against order-in-Appeal No.34/BPL/2013 dated 05/02/2013 regarding Cenvat credit on various services, including trading activity considered as exempted service.

Analysis:
The Department filed an appeal against an order-in-Appeal regarding the appellant's availing of Cenvat credit on various services during 2010-2011, including trading activity considered as exempted service. The Department contended that since the appellant did not maintain separate accounts for input services used for taxable and exempted activities, they should pay under Rule 6(3A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The Department argued that trading activity was to be considered exempted, even for the disputed period before the amendment. The respondent argued that trading was included as an exempted service only from 01/04/2011 and the notification could not have retrospective effect. The authorities held that the trading activity was considered exempted only from 01/04/2011 and dismissed the appeal, as the amendment to the Cenvat Credit Rules was not retrospective.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the authorities that the trading activity was deemed exempted only from 01/04/2011 and not for the disputed period. As the amendment to the Cenvat Credit Rules was not retrospective, the Department's appeal was dismissed.

---