2006 (3) TMI 422 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of sub-rule (5) of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules of 1944 regarding the time limit for taking credit by the manufacturer.
2. Endorsement requirement for bill of entry as per Circular No. 179/13/96-C.X.

Analysis:
1. The judgment deals with the interpretation of sub-rule (5) of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules of 1944. The issue revolves around the computation of the six-month period for taking credit by the manufacturer. The appellant argues that the phrase "after six months of the date of issue of any document" should mean six months after the date of issue, while the department contends it should be computed from the date of issue itself. The credit in question was taken on 28-11-96 for invoices dated 28-9-97. The Tribunal notes that the phrase is capable of being interpreted as the period being computed after the date of issue of the document, which would make the entries made on 28-5-97 fall within the six-month period. The Tribunal finds that the Appellate Commissioner did not consider this aspect, necessitating further examination. Therefore, a prima facie case has been established, requiring reconsideration.

2. Regarding the bill of entry mentioned in the show cause notice, it was found that the bills were not endorsed in favor of the appellant's Bhopal unit as required by Circular No. 179/13/96-C.X. The duty element in question amounted to Rs. 1,26,526 out of the total duty demand. Considering the circumstances, the Tribunal directs a stay of the impugned order on the condition that the appellant deposits Rs. 1 lakh within six weeks. Failure to comply will result in the appeal being dismissed. Upon depositing the specified amount, the pre-deposit of the remaining sum under the impugned order will be waived. The matter is scheduled for a compliance report on 10-4-2006, concluding the application.