Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.
CENVAT Credit — The Petitioner prayed for a declaration that the action of the respondents in not allowing the credit of excise duty paid on capital goods which were in transit as on 01.07.2017 is violative of Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and the respondents be directed to allow such credit to the petitioner. Section 140 of the CGST Act is a transitional provision which covers the situation of migration of unutilized CENVAT credit; both pertaining to input and capital goods and the classification between capital goods and inputs was an artificial demarcation. The petitioner contended that once the duty was paid by the assessee upon purchase of capital goods, the same could be utilized for discharging assessee's liability of tax. This right is a vested right and cannot be taken away by the legislation. Department opposed the petition that Court cannot strike down a statutory provision merely on the opinion that the same is unreasonable or harsh. The Supreme Court repelled the challenge observing inter alia that the conditions under which the concessions and the benefits is given is always to be strictly construed. The time under which a return is to be filed for the purpose of assessment of tax cannot be dependent on the will of a dealer. Petition dismissed observing that court do not find that the statute in any manner violates Article 14 or 19(1)(g) of the constitution and it can also not be seen as taking away an existing right to claim CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on capital goods. — Rspl Ltd. Vs. UOI  5 TAXLOK.COM 69 (Guj)