2009 (6) TMI 915

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etween 28-3-1994 to 7-3-1995, which are within the period of six months from the date of invoices. 3. Ld. Advocate on behalf of the appellant submits that there was a dispute on admissibility of credit on inputs namely HDPE bags during the period September, 1993 to March, 1994. The Tribunal vide Final Order dated 16-3-98 held that HDPE bags are 'inputs' and credit is admissible. It was also held that though at that time, there was no period prescribed for availing Cenvat credit, a period of six months from the date of receipt of the inputs would be a reasonable period. The matter was remanded to verify whether any inputs have arrived in the appellant's factory during the said period. The de novo adjudication was completed vide Adjudicati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ount is relevant. 6. After hearing both the sides, I find that the Single Member Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Brakes India Ltd. (supra) held as under:- "6. In view of credit having been taken in RG23A, Part-I within six months from the date of input document, it cannot be said that availment was done irregularly. Therefore, the Commissioner's rejection of assessee's plea is not correct and is not in terms of Board's circular and the citation referred to. Therefore, the party's appeal is allowed." 7. The other Single Member Bench of Tribunal in the case of SPAC Tapioca Products (India) Ltd. (supra) held as under:- "4. I have carefully considered the submissions. The learned Counsel has stressed the fact that, even though ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....undisputedly beyond six months from the date on which the relevant invoice was issued. That is the end of the matter. The Hon'ble Supreme Court's ruling works against the appellants' case. 5. In the result, the impugned order stands affirmed and the appeal stands dismissed." 8. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Osram Surya (P) Ltd. [2002 (142) E.L.T. 5 (S.C.)] (supra) the assessee had received their inputs for the manufacture of their respective products, had taken credit under the Modvat Scheme, admittedly, after six months from the date of issue of the documents specified in the said proviso to Rule 57G. The issue is to be decided whether the proviso to the Rule in question is applicable to the cases of manufa....