2006 (11) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cise duties were paid, but the respondent took credit of only the Basic Excise duties aggregating to Rs. 3,72,449/- on account of a bona fide impression that credit of only basic duty was available because SED was not available for discharge of duty on the respondent's final products. During the March, 2002 to January, 2003, the Special Excise duty was not availed as credit in respect of 22 consignments of Hexane on the same plea. Subsequently, on 21-2-2003, the respondent took credit of Special Excise duties aggregating to Rs. 3,72,449/- and Rs. 4,87,024/- for all the above 16 and 22 consignments respectively on realizing that credit of SED was also available and wrote a letter to the Central Excise Department informing it about the act....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pecial excise duty immediately on receipts of inputs in the factory although they accounted all the inputs in their account properly. Under the wrong impression of their excise clerk that the special excise duty was not available to them because, this special excise duty is not leviable on their final product. In the case of M/s. Stress Crete Pvt. Ltd., v. Union of India [2000 (119) E.L.T. 542 (MP)] the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has held that when the Rule does not prescribe any time limit, credit cannot be denied. Further it appears that it is a procedural lapse, hence Cenvat credit cannot be denied when facts of receipts of inputs by the appellants and duty paid character of the inputs is not disputed as held by the Hon'ble Tribunal in....