Prospective Cenvat credit limitation cannot defeat entitlement accrued on inputs and services received before the amended rule took effect.

The six-month time limit for availing Cenvat credit introduced by Notification No. 21/2014-CE (NT) applies prospectively and does not restrict credit entitlement that accrued when duty-paid inputs or input services were received before the amendment. Where no limitation existed on the receipt date, subsequent insertion of the time limit cannot curtail credit based on pre-amendment invoices. The relevant date is receipt of the inputs or services, not the later recording of credit in the RG-23A Part II register. Accordingly, credit on pre-amendment invoices remained valid, and the related interest demand and penalty could not survive.

---

---

Issues: Whether the six-month time limit for availment of Cenvat credit introduced by Notification No. 21/2014-CE (NT) applied to inputs and input services received before the amendment came into effect.

Analysis: The inputs and input services were received before the amended time-limit provisions became effective, when no limitation governed availment of credit. The entitlement to credit had therefore accrued upon receipt of the duty-paid inputs and services. The subsequently introduced six-month limitation operated prospectively and could not curtail that accrued entitlement in respect of pre-amendment invoices. The relevant date was the date of receipt of the inputs and input services, rather than the later entry of credit in the RG-23A Part II register.

Conclusion: The six-month limitation was inapplicable to the pre-amendment invoices; the Cenvat credit was validly availed, and the associated interest demand and penalty could not survive.

---