2002 (2) TMI 1141 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Eligibility for Modvat credit on duty paid on inputs used in manufacturing final products exported out of the country.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, raised the issue of whether M/s. Peacock Pigments Pvt. Ltd. is entitled to receive Modvat credit for the duty paid on inputs utilized in manufacturing final products exported abroad. The Appellants contended that despite opting out of the Modvat Credit Scheme, they should still be allowed to avail credit under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules for exporting their final product, Ultra Marine Blue. They argued that due to the nature of their manufacturing process, it was not feasible to segregate raw materials, and they had declared their intention to maintain RG 23-Part I for availing credit. However, the revenue authorities disallowed the credit, citing non-compliance with Rule 57G declaration and failure to maintain separate accounts of inputs for export goods.

In response, the learned DR for the Revenue supported the findings of the lower authorities, emphasizing the Appellants' non-compliance with the necessary provisions. Upon reviewing the submissions from both sides, the Tribunal examined Rule 57F(4) which governed the use of Modvat credit at the relevant time. It was noted that the first proviso to sub-rule (4) allowed credit on inputs used in final products cleared for export, subject to specified conditions. However, since the Appellants had opted out of the Modvat Credit Scheme, the rules related to Modvat credit were deemed inapplicable to them. As Rule 57F falls under Chapter 5, Section AA of the Central Excise Rules concerning credit of duty paid on excisable goods used as inputs, the Tribunal concluded that the provisions of Rule 57F(4) did not apply to the Appellants in the absence of their participation in the Modvat Credit Scheme.

The Tribunal pointed out that there were alternative provisions in the Central Excise Rules for claiming rebate on duty paid for goods exported, suggesting that the Appellants could explore seeking rebate under those provisions if permissible by law. Given that the Modvat Rules were not applicable to the Appellants due to their opt-out status from the scheme, the Tribunal rejected their appeal for claiming Modvat credit under Rule 57F(4). Ultimately, the decision rested on the Appellants' choice to exit the Modvat Credit Scheme, rendering them ineligible to avail of the credit under the specific rule in question.