2010 (8) TMI 258

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....der Rule 57G for the purpose of availing Cenvat Credit. After awaiting for permission of the Assistant Commissioner to give credit in terms of transitional provision, in December, 1996 they took credit of Rs.15,792/- + Rs. 2,14,769/- in respect of inputs lying in stock as on 16-3-95 and 10-4-95. They also took credit of inputs received by them during the period from15-4-95to May, 1996 in December, 1996. The credit taken by the appellants stands denied on the ground that in all these cases the appellants have taken the credit after expiry of six months from the date of receipt of documents based on which they have taken the credit. Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the order of the original authority. 4. Learned Advocate for the appellant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellants own admission might have been received in the office of jurisdictional Central Excise officer on 12-4-95 and therefore, the declaration has not been filed within the specified time limit. The declaration of stock dated 28-7-95 partly related to inputs lying on 16-3-95 involving credit of Rs. 15,792/- and the rest relate to the stock lying as on 10-4-95 involving the credit of Rs. 2,14,768/-. This declaration have been filed beyond the time limit specified and therefore they are not eligible for benefit. He also relies on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Yeast Alco Enzymes Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 2006 (194) E.L.T. 269 (Guj.) wherein it has been held that time limit prescribed under Rule 57G....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... months period. For any manufacturer taking credit, they had to fulfil the condition of the time limit in respect of inputs covered by documents received from the date29-6-95onwards. At the same time, the decision relied upon by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Industrial Cables clearly ruled that Rule 57 G which was introduced on29-6-95cannot be allowed to operate for earlier period. Therefore, the appellants shall be eligible for credit on the basis of documents relating to the period15-4-95to28-6-95without reference to limit of 6 months period for taking credit. However, this amount has not been separately quantified. For the period from29-6-95, the appellants would be entitled to credit only if they had taken ....