2011 (2) TMI 537 - AT - Customs

Demand - Advance licence - Notification No. 203/92-Cus., dated 19-5-1992 - DEEC scheme - Reversal of MODVAT credit - the appellant has not categorically stated so in the grounds of the appeal, they purport to say that, unless the amount of Rs. 87,158/- was reversed by the respondent in their MODVAT account and interest thereon paid within the prescribed period, the benefit of the amnesty scheme would not be admissible to them - It is submitted that such reversal of credit was done in terms of a clarificatory circular issued by the Board, viz. Circular No. 318/34/97-CX. dated 26-6-1997 - such a certificate of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Div. III, Surat, which certifies thus It is certified that the particulars of MODVAT amount reversed/debited and the amount paid as per the details shown in this statement are true and correct. The referred amount reversed in terms of Public Notice No. 9/97 - Appeal is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
Whether duty forgone under Notification No. 203/92-Cus. should be paid by the respondent.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Issue of Duty Forgone Under Notification:
- The appeal by the Revenue questioned if the respondent must pay the duty forgone under Notification No. 203/92-Cus. for raw material imported under the DEEC scheme.
- The department alleged a breach of condition No. v (a) of the Notification due to availing input-stage credit for exported finished goods, proposing duty recovery, interest, confiscation, and penalty.
- The Commissioner of Customs dropped these proposals after the respondent reversed MODVAT credit and paid interest as certified by Central Excise authorities.
- The Revenue contended that the entire MODVAT credit was not reversed, thus challenging the respondent's eligibility for the amnesty scheme.
- The respondent argued they had reversed the full MODVAT credit based on Circular No. 318/34/97-CX and a previous judgment discussing the amnesty scheme.
- A certificate from the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise confirmed the reversal of MODVAT credit as per the public notice.

2. Judgment and Conclusion:
- The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order, stating that the respondent's reversal of MODVAT credit was in compliance with the relevant circular and public notice.
- Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the decision in favor of the respondent.

This detailed analysis covers the issues surrounding the duty forgone under Notification No. 203/92-Cus., the alleged breach of conditions, the reversal of MODVAT credit, and the eligibility for the amnesty scheme, leading to the final judgment by the Tribunal in favor of the respondent.