2015 (4) TMI 959

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty on their clearance. On 22.07.1996 the Vanaspati Oil was declared as exempted goods. Therefore, the appellant was not required to pay duty on the clearance of Vanaspati Oil from 23.07.1996. At the same time, there was Cenvat Credit lying in their Cenvat Credit account unutilized. On 01.03.2003 duty on Vanaspati Oil was re-introduced and appellant availed the Cenvat Credit lying unutilized as on 22.07.1996 for payment of duty in the month of May 2004 to the tune of Rs. 38,86,999/-. Same was intimated to the department in June 2004. In October 2004, the appellant realized that they have taken Cenvat Credit of Rs. 15,34,773/- without having relevant documents in their custody, they suo moto reversed the credit. Thereafter, in June 2005, a sh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not entitled to utilize the Cenvat Credit as there are certain conditions for utilization of the same. She further submits that the adjudicating authority has also examined the availment of Cenvat Credit on inputs which was used in clearance for May 2004 were not the same inputs on which credit was lying unutilized on 22.07.1996. Therefore, they cannot utilize the Cenvat Credit account. She further submits that the case law relied upon by the Ld. Counsel has been examined by the Ld. Commissioner (A). Therefore, case law relied upon by the Ld. Counsel are not relevant to the facts of this case. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. In this case the appellant has utilized Cenvat Credit lying unutilized in their Cenvat Cr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nnot lapse. As pointed out by the Supreme Court in the case of Tungabhadra Industries ltd., Central Excise Act does not permit divestment of any accrued right of a person acquired by virtue of any of the provisions contained in the Act, rules, notification, order, etc. Moreover it is rightly pointed out by Mr. Bajoria that even in cases, where by specific enactment a vested right is taken away in violation of the provisions contained in Section 38A of the Act, the Apex Court has unhesitatingly preserved such accrued right. 13. That the petitioner no.1 had acquired money-credit to the extent of Rs. 7,32,78,689/- in terms of the notification under the money-credit scheme. Such money credit scheme permitted the petitioner no.1 to utilise su....