2001 (11) TMI 208 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of the effective date of Notification No. 28/95-C.E.
2. Applicability of the notification to invoices issued prior to 29-6-1995.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Interpretation of the effective date of Notification No. 28/95-C.E.
The appellants availed Modvat credit based on invoices issued beyond six months from the date of issuance, resulting in a reversal of credit as directed by the Range Superintendent. The contention arose regarding the effective date of Notification No. 28/95-C.E., dated 29-6-1995. The appellants argued that the notification should only apply from the date the Official Gazette, publishing the notification, was made available to the public. However, the Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected this argument. The advocate for the appellants cited a previous Supreme Court ruling, but the Tribunal held that the subsequent Supreme Court decision overruled the earlier ruling. The Tribunal concurred with the Revenue's representative that both issues were already decided against the appellants by the Supreme Court and the Larger Bench of the Tribunal.

Issue 2: Applicability of the notification to invoices issued prior to 29-6-1995
The second issue revolved around whether the notification would be applicable to invoices issued before 29-6-1995. The advocate for the appellants referenced a Tribunal decision in the case of Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd., which held that after the amendment of Rule 174, the appellants could not take credit beyond six months from the date of duty-paying documents issued before the said amendment. The Revenue's representative asserted that both issues had been conclusively settled against the appellants by the Supreme Court and the Tribunal's Larger Bench, rendering them non-justiciable.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, upheld the decisions against the appellants, emphasizing the binding nature of the Supreme Court's rulings and the Tribunal's precedents. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the inapplicability of Modvat credit beyond the stipulated time frame and the effective date of the notification as per legal interpretations.