2006 (2) TMI 519 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Exemption under Notification No. 178/83-C.E. repealed from 1-3-94.
2. Consideration of Rule 56A benefit for stock at the time of exemption repeal.
3. Availability of proforma credit for stock on hand.
4. Interpretation of Notification No. 70/94 regarding duty credit under Rule 56A.

Analysis:
1. The respondent manufactured textured yarn exempt under Notification No. 178/83-C.E., which was later repealed. The Tribunal directed the revenue authorities to consider Rule 56A benefit for stock at the time of exemption repeal, following the Supreme Court decision in Formica India Division v. C.C.E. - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 511 (S.C.).

2. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the Rule 56A benefit to the respondent, leading to the present appeal by the revenue. The revenue contended that proforma credit was not available for stock on hand, citing Notification No. 70/94-C.E., dated 16-3-94, allowing clearance of textured yarn at a reduced rate until 30th April, 1994.

3. The respondent argued that Notification No. 70/94 stipulated no duty credit under Rule 56A for availing its benefits. The respondent could choose between Rule 56A or Notification 70/94. The Commissioner's decision was based on the Formica India Division judgment, supporting the respondent's position.

4. The Tribunal found that assesses had the option to work under Rule 56A or pay duty at the notified rate during the relevant period. Notification No. 70/94's reference to Rule 56A confirmed the availability of the Rule 56A option even during the notification's validity. The appellant sought Rule 56A benefit for inputs received, and the Commissioner's decision was upheld as correct. The appeal was dismissed.