2020 (1) TMI 1617

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... date of issue of invoice. He pointed out that the invoices were issued during April to June, 2014. The amendment prescribing the limit for availing credit within 6 months was introduced on 01/09/2014. The credit was taken in January, 2015. He further pointed out that in the limit for availing credit was changed from one year to six months on 01/03/2015. Learned Counsel pointed out that the matter is examined by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Global Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. 2019 (26) G.S.T.L. 470 (Del.) and it has been held that in these circumstances, credit cannot be denied for the invoices issued prior to 01/09/2014 when the time limit for availing the Cenvat Credit introduced. 3. Learned Authorised Representative relies on the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the first time cannot be given retrospective effect. It is further held as under : "11. Now it is a well-settled rule of interpretation hallowed by time and sanctified by judicial decisions that, unless the terms of a statute expressly so provide or necessarily require it, retrospective operation should not be given to a statute so as to take away or impair an existing right or create a new obligation or impose a new liability otherwise than as regards matters of procedure. The general rule as stated by Halsbury in Volume 36 of the Laws of England (Third Edition) and reiterated in several decisions of this court as well as English Courts is that - "all statutes other than those which are merely declaratory or which relate ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the benefit of credit of eligible duties on the purchases made by the first stage dealer as per the then existing CENVAT credit rules was a vested right. By virtue of clause (iv) of Sub-Section (3) of Section 140A such right has been taken away with retrospective effect in relation to goods which were purchased prior to one year from the appointed day. This retrospectivity given to the provision has no rational or reasonable basis for imposition of the condition. The reasons cited in limiting the exercise of rights have no co-relation with the advent of GST regime. Same factors, parameters and considerations of "in order to co-relate the goods or administrative convenience" prevailed even under the Central Excise Act and the CENVAT Credi....