2018 (10) TMI 1762

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntry No. 84 of the first schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant avails CENVAT Credit of Central Excise duty paid on the inputs, used in, or in relation to manufacture of the said final products. During the disputed period, the appellant had received the duty paid excisable goods, which were removed initially from the factory premises on payment of Central Excise duty under nine numbers of invoices, issued between the period 16.03.2006 and 31.10.2006. Those duty paid goods were received back under the provisions of Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 for carrying out the process of repair/reconditioning etc. Such activities were undertaken in the factory premises between the period 29.12.2006 and 20.03.2007. Aft....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ods in the factory. She has relied upon the decisions of this Tribunal in the case of Steel Authority of India v Commissioner of Central Excise - 2013 (287) ELT 321 (Tri. Del) and SGS India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise 2011 (270) ELT 115 (Tri.Mum), to state that such delayed availment of credit is in conformity with the Cenvat statute. Further, she has also referred to the CBEC's Excise Manual of Supplementary Instructions 2005, to submit that if the credit is taken subsequently at a later date, the same cannot be denied. 4. On the other hand, learned A.R. appearing for Revenue reiterates the finding recorded in the impugned order. He also relied on the judgment dated 23.01.2007 delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ich were subsequently returned back to the factory. The department has not objected to the fact of availment of credit by the appellant. The only objection raised by the department is that the credit has not been availed immediately on receipt of the duty paid goods, accompanied with the invoices. So far as Rule 4 ibid is concerned, the requirement is that "credit on the inputs may be taken immediately". Since the legislatures have used the word 'may' for interpretation of the statute, it cannot be construed differently to mean that the said phrase has to be strictly interpreted. In other words, the authorities conferred with the power to interpret the statutory provisions, should harmoniously read the contents of the statute for th....