2001 (10) TMI 203 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Admissibility of Modvat credit on the basis of a reconstructed Bill of Entry.
- Time limitation for availing Modvat credit under Rule 57G(5) of the Central Excise Rules.

Analysis:
1. The appellants were denied Modvat credit on inputs due to the loss of the triplicate copy of the Bill of Entry. Customs authorities issued a reconstructed copy later. The Assistant Commissioner disallowed the credit, imposed a penalty, and the appeal was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals).

2. The show cause notice raised two grounds for denying Modvat credit: reconstructed Bill of Entry not valid and credit taken after six months from the original Bill of Entry. The first ground was abandoned, and the focus shifted to the time limitation issue. The Commissioner (Appeals) denied credit on the first ground but did not address the time-bar question.

3. The appellant's counsel argued that a reconstructed Bill of Entry is valid for Modvat purposes, citing a previous Tribunal decision. Regarding the time limitation, the counsel contended that the period should start from the date of the reconstructed Bill of Entry issuance, which was within the six-month limit. Reference was made to another Tribunal decision supporting this argument.

4. The Junior Departmental Representative supported the Assistant Commissioner and Commissioner (Appeals) findings.

5. The Tribunal referred to a previous case's decision where credit on inputs was allowed based on a reconstructed Bill of Entry. It was concluded that the date of reconstruction should be considered for the time-bar under Rule 57G(5). A similar case was cited where credit taken within six months from rectification of invoice defects was deemed admissible. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, considering these precedents.

6. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants based on the acceptance of the reconstructed Bill of Entry for Modvat credit and the interpretation of the time limitation rule. The decision was in line with previous Tribunal judgments and provided consequential reliefs to the appellants.