News Update

 
Time Limit to avail Cenvat Credit - Legal Validity

JULY 11, 2014

By Abhijit Saha, Director (Indirect Tax), BDO India

CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR) has been amended to state that a manufacturer or a service provider shall take credit on inputs and input services within a period of six months from the date of issue of invoice, bill or challan with effect from 1 st September, 2014. Such amendment has been introduced as proviso to Rule 4(1) and fifth proviso to Rule 4(7) of the CCR.

This reminds me that such restriction was once imposed long time back during the time of Modvat Credit Rules and then subsequently withdrawn. It seems the Board has not learnt from its mistake. They have again introduced such draconian provision which curtails the accrued right of the assessee.

It is understandable that the refund claim has to be made within one year from the date of payment of duty and similarly the demand has to be made within one year from the relevant date for short levy or non-levy. There is an administrative justification to it. However, if a right has accrued to an assessee in a similar manner as credit of money by way of deposit in the bank account, can anybody contend that if you do not update your pass book within six months such deposit would get reversed?

Moreover, in case of partial reverse charge, credit would be available only after the payment of the value of the input service and service tax thereon. So if the said payment is made after six months from the date of tax invoice by the service provider, then the right to avail the CENVAT credit is denied before it is accrued to the assessee. This is ridiculous.

In case, the payment to the service provider is not made within three months from the date of invoice, then the CENVAT credit so taken has to be reversed. Again the said tax amount can be re-credited once the payment is made. There is no time limit for such re-credit. Now, since no credit can be taken after six months from the date of the invoice, how such re-credit can happen. The restriction clause of six months does not specify that it is the first credit and re-credit is not covered by the restriction to avail the credit.

In the same way re-credit of CENVAT credit reversed on account of non-receipt of export proceeds within the stipulated period or extended period is to be allowed, if the export proceeds are received within one year from the period so specified or extended period. This can be done on the basis of the documents evidencing receipt of export proceeds. In such an event, how does the restriction of six month time limit apply?

In view of the above, it may be stated that the law should not be made to illegally deprive the tax payer and the rightful claim of the assesse should not be taken away for reasons which are not legally valid and in no way reflect public interest.


 RECENT DISCUSSION(S) POST YOUR COMMENTS
   
 
Sub: Suggestion

The amendment per se is well intended because in the absence of defacing of invoices on which cenvat was availed, it is almost impossible for the officers to verify whether there are any instances of double availment of credit. However, the situations discussed in the above article can be accommodated by amending relevant provisions, but not by scrapping the original idea.

Posted by Ramasesha Rao Chepuri
 
Sub: Time Limit to avail Cenvat Credit

Intially, a period of one year may be fixed for taking the credit and subsequently, be reduced to six months. Exception has to be made to cover the situations where exempted goods or services are subject to tax or duty on account of (a) Legistlative changes (b) audit by the Department (c) Adjudication or Appeal.

Posted by Devinder sharma
 
Sub: Claim of Cenvat Credit

I thought that new set of Babus will do some good job in this case, however I was proven wrong as no answers have been found in this case for following questions:-
If Assesse has to avail Cenvat with in 6 months from the date of invoice or else it is lapsed, but what happens in case Refund by BABU is not granted with in 3 months? There is only a mute provision of interest which practically works one way i.e., if assesse does not pay duty in time or wrong availement of credit etc.
Now Assesse is penalized for not availing credit in 6 months but no BABU is penalized for delayed refund claim. Also I found compulsory Pre-deposit, so now if you don’t agree with EA-2000 Audit team, he will put up a report and Hon AC/DC will issue you frivolous SCN for recovery, to appeal assesse has to pre-deposit 7.5% of demand, the order will get confirmed mechanically, hence assess will appeal in CESTAT with further 10% pre deposit, if the case is ruled in favor of assesse after 10 to 15 years(that is period it takes in india to decide a simple case of CENVAT credit availement), assesse losses interest to the tune of almost double the amount of pre-deposit, all the losses are for assesse nothing for BABU, QUESTION IS WHY ONLY THE PUNISHMENT FOR ASSESSEE AND NOTHING FOR BABUS?
SIMPLE ANSWER: Assesses are doing business in India which itself is a wrong doing is it so?
CAN ANY BODY LISTEN THIS


Posted by Purushottam Sandye
 

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.