9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Manufacturers claiming Modvat credit on inputs exempted from duty under Government orders. Analysis: The judgment involves five appeals referred to the Larger Bench, where manufacturers claimed Modvat credit on inputs exempted from duty based on Government orders. The department argued that since there was evidence that the inputs did not suffer duty, deemed credit was inadmissible. The issues were analyzed by the Larger Bench in a previous case, where it was determined that inputs not duty paid or charged to nil rate of duty qualified for deemed credit under specific conditions. The Bench clarified that manufacturers must clearly state their entitlement to the benefit of the order and address any exceptions listed. It was emphasized that the mere existence of an exemption notification was insufficient to prove duty exemption, especially in cases of conditional exemptions where all conditions must be satisfied. The onus was on the manufacturer to prove exceptions, while the Revenue had to verify claims and conduct necessary inquiries. The judgment highlighted the importance of cooperation between the assessee and the Revenue in establishing the validity of claimed exemptions. In conclusion, the appeals were decided based on the principles established by the Larger Bench, emphasizing the need for manufacturers to clearly demonstrate their entitlement to deemed credit under Government orders. The judgment underscored the role of both the assessee and the Revenue in providing and verifying necessary documentation to support or refute claims of duty exemption.
|
