2019 (11) TMI 8

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Mono Methyl Amine Nitrate falling under Chapter36 of CETA, 1985. During the course of scrutiny of records of the appellant by the Departmental Audit Officer for the period from October 2014 to March 2016, it was noticed that the appellant had availed CENVAT credit of Rs. 4,37,222/- on the strength of invoices after lapse of six months/one year from the date of issue. As per proviso to Rule 4 of the CCR, 2004 as amended by Notification No.21/2014 CE (NT) dated 11.07.2014 and No.6/2015 CE (NT) dated 01.03.2015, the credit shall be taken within 6 months/one year of issue of specified documents as mentioned under Rule 9 of the Rules. Accordingly, a SCN dated 28.06.2017 was issued demanding CENVAT credit of Rs. 4,37,222/- along with interest and....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., fixing time limit of six months from the date of invoice, effective from 01.09.2014 vide Notification No.21/2014-CE (NT) dated 11.07.2014 and fixing time limit of one year from 01.03.2015 vide Notification No.06/2015-CE (NT) dated 01.03.2015, which the appellant was not aware of. He further argued that appellant took credit of the invoices which was kept pending on 05.06.2014 and utilized the same for payment of duty on goods, on the bona fide belief that the appellant was eligible to avail the CENVAT credit on the basis of the said invoices. He further submitted that the Tribunal finally held that the commission paid for sales promotion was an 'input service' in relation to manufacture and clearance of finished goods. The appellant avail....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....issioner of C.Ex., Indore reported in 2007 (207) ELT 99 (Tri. Del.). The Learned Counsel further submitted that there is no dispute regarding eligibility to CENVAT credit except limitation of time and there is no dispute regarding correctness of the documents for taking credit. The only ground on which the CENVAT credit has been disallowed is that CENVAT credit was not taken within the time limit of six months/one year from the date of issue of invoices, which is a procedural requirement and it is condonable in view of the fact that no time limit was prescribed for taking CENVAT credit earlier under the revised CCR, 2004 up to August 2014 and the appellant was under bona fide belief that there was no time limit for taking credit. He further....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urt decision in the case of Housing Board Vs CCE, Madras, 1994 (74) ELT 9 (SC) and M/s Cosmic Dye Chemical Vs CCE, Bombay, 1995 (75) ELT 721 (SC). 5. On the other hand, Learned AR defended the impugned order and submitted that the appellant has availed the CENVAT credit beyond the limitation of time as prescribed in Rule 4 and therefore the same has rightly been rejected. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the appellant did not avail the CENVAT credit on Service Tax paid on commission to the Commission Agent because there was a dispute whether the said service falls in the definition of 'input service' and a SCN was issued to the appellant and therefore, the appellan....