2018 (9) TMI 1778 – CESTAT, Delhi – TMI – CENVAT Credit – stock lying in their factory – Bills of Entries which are more than six months old – Held that:- An identical issue was dealt by the Tribunal in the case of M/s Sanwariya Tiles Pvt. Ltd. & others Vs. CEC & CGST, Jodhpur [2018 (6) TMI 783 – CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was held that By adopting the principles of harmonious construction and interpretation of rule, the appellant right to avail the credit at the time of coming out of the exemption scheme cannot be curtailed down by adopting Rule 4(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules – credit allowed – appeal allowed – decided in favor of appellant. – Appeal No. E/52061/2018-SM (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 101(AG)/CE/JDR/2018 dated 24.2.
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
venue by entertaining a view that they cannot avail the Cenvat credit on the basis of the Bills of Entries which are more than six months old, initiatied proceedings against them resulting in passing of the present impugned orders. 3. I find that an identical issue was dealt by the Tribunal in the case of M/s Sanwariya Tiles Pvt. Ltd. & others Vs. CEC & CGST, Jodhpur vide Final Order No. 52101-52102/2018 dated 1.6.2018, the Tribunal observed as under: 5. After hearing both the sides, I find that there is no dispute about the appellant s entitlement to avail the credit of the inputs lying in stock as on the date of their crossing the exemption limit, in terms of Rule 3(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. There is also no dispute abo
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ication. Their right to avail the credit would arise only on crossing the exemption limit. Such right specifically stands extended to them by the provisions of Rule 3(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and cannot be extinguished by making reference to Rule 4(1). Rule 4(1) which provide for availment of credit within a period of six months from the relevant document applies whether an assessee is already working under the cenvat credit scheme and is availing the cenvat on regular basis. A harmonious interpretation of both the rules leads to the above conclusion. By referring to one provision of law, the other provision cannot be made otiose, as per the settled principle of interpretation. It is not the appellant s fault that they crossed the exem
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =