Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a registered manufacturing unit engaged in prototype vehicle manufacture was entitled to avail Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods during periods when final prototype vehicles were not cleared, and whether clearance of inputs as such on payment of duty converted the unit into a trading unit so as to deny credit.
Analysis: The unit was registered with Central Excise and was manufacturing prototype vehicles on payment of duty. Under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, inputs received in the factory of a manufacturer are eligible inputs, and under Rule 3 credit may be taken on receipt of inputs in the factory. If inputs are cleared as such, Rule 3(5) requires reversal or payment of duty equal to the credit, which was done in this case. A long interval in prototype manufacture does not change the character of the unit from manufacturer to trader. The unit was also entitled to avail credit in terms of Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, subject to duty payment when the goods were cleared.
Conclusion: The denial of Cenvat credit was unsustainable and the assessee was entitled to the credit.
Ratio Decidendi: A registered manufacturer does not lose entitlement to Cenvat credit merely because there is a long gap between clearances, if inputs are received in the factory and duty is discharged on inputs cleared as such.