Accrued Cenvat credit rights survive later procedural amendments when eligible inputs were received before the change.

Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because the entry was made after 1.3.2001 when the eligible inputs had been received and the right to credit had already accrued before that date. The inputs were received in January and February 2001, duly recorded in the input registers, and the delay was only in making the RG-23A Part-II entry. The amendment to Rule 57AB from 1.3.2001 was directed to inputs received on or after that date and did not extinguish an accrued entitlement absent clear retrospective intent. The credit demand and penalty were therefore set aside, and the appeal succeeded with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit could be denied merely because the credit was taken after 1.3.2001, when the inputs had been received and the entitlement to credit had arisen before that date.

Analysis: The appellant had received duty-paid inputs in January and February 2001 and had duly recorded them in the input registers. The only delay was in making the credit entry in RG-23A Part-II. The amended wording of Rule 57AB, introduced from 1.3.2001, was intended to regulate credit on inputs received on or after that date in the context of National Calamity Contingent Duty, which came into force for the first time on 1.3.2001. The earlier entitlement to credit had already accrued when the inputs were received, and the subsequent amendment did not take away that accrued right. The Board's circular relied upon the same principle in an identical transition from Rule 57AC to Rule 57AB.

Conclusion: The assessee could not be denied credit for inputs received before 1.3.2001 merely because the credit was availed later; the denial was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The credit demand and penalty were set aside, and the appeal succeeded with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the right to Cenvat credit has already accrued on receipt of eligible inputs, a later procedural amendment governing the timing of availment does not extinguish that accrued entitlement absent clear retrospective intent.

---