2005 (2) TMI 669 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Denial of deemed Modvat credit due to improper declaration on invoices.

Analysis:
The appeal concerns the denial of deemed Modvat credit to the respondents due to issues with the proper declaration on invoices. The adjudicating authority disallowed the credit as the invoices did not carry the required declaration regarding the charge of duty by the manufacturer/supplier of the inputs. However, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) reversed this decision based on a judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court.

During the period in question, the manufacturer/supplier of the inputs were operating under the Compounded Levy Scheme, making them liable to discharge duty under Rule 96ZP in accordance with Section 3A of the Act. The invoices issued to the respondents lacked the necessary declaration confirming duty discharge. The respondents needed to demonstrate that the duty liability was indeed discharged by the manufacturer/supplier at the time of clearance or subsequently. The judgment in the case of M/s. Vikas Pipes was deemed inapplicable to the respondents' situation due to the absence of a declaration or evidence proving duty discharge.

The Appellate Tribunal found that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in applying the precedent from the Vikas Pipes case without considering the specific circumstances of this case. The matter was deemed deserving of re-examination, suggesting that the Commissioner (Appeals) should reassess the situation after providing an opportunity for the respondents to present evidence or obtaining a report on duty discharge from the relevant authority.

As a result, the impugned order was set aside, and the case was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision. The appeal of the Revenue was allowed by way of remand, indicating a need for further review and clarification on the deemed Modvat credit issue.