2016 (11) TMI 275 - AT - Central Excise

MODVAT credit - Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Held that - the impugned order has not considered the factual matrix in proper perspective. Appellant imported the goods and discharged appropriate duty. He is eligible to avail modified credit of the countervailing duty paid. While availing such credit he availed less than credit eligible, subsequently on his own noticing he availed the balance credit. We find that there is no dispute as to availment amount of the credit in first instance, hence availing differential credit subsequently is not barred or hit by the provisions of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. This view settled by the judgement of the Tribunal in the case of Parasrampuria Synthetics Limited 1998 (7) TMI 398 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI . Appeal allowed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Denial of MODVAT credit beyond 6 months under Rule 57G of Central Excise Rules, 1944.

The judgment deals with an appeal against an Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. The issue at hand is the denial of MODVAT credit to the appellant on the grounds of availing the credit beyond the stipulated 6 months as per Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal notes that the impugned order did not consider the factual matrix correctly. The appellant imported goods, paid the appropriate duty, and was entitled to avail modified credit of the countervailing duty paid. Initially, the appellant availed less credit than eligible, but later corrected this by availing the balance credit. The Tribunal observes that since there is no dispute regarding the initial credit availed, availing the differential credit subsequently is not prohibited by Rule 57G. The Tribunal cites a previous judgment in the case of Parasrampuria Synthetics Limited to support this interpretation.

After hearing the Departmental Representative and examining the records, the Tribunal concludes that the impugned order is unsustainable. Therefore, the Tribunal sets aside the impugned order and allows the appeal. The Tribunal emphasizes that the appellant's action of availing the balance credit after initially availing less than eligible is justified and not in violation of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The decision is based on a thorough analysis of the facts and legal provisions, ensuring that the appellant's entitlement to the MODVAT credit is upheld.