1994 (9) TMI 207 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Deemed modvat credit facility denial.
2. Effective date of notification.
3. Interpretation of relevant case laws.
4. Applicability of Trade Notices.
5. Nature of order under Rule 57G.

Deemed Modvat Credit Facility Denial:
The appeal concerns the denial of deemed modvat credit facility to the appellants from 3-11-1987, as upheld by the order-in-appeal. The appellant's representative argued that they only became aware of the order issued by the Central Government on 2-11-1987 in January 1988, and the Trade Notice issued on 3-12-1987 was relied upon for denying the credit facility. The appellant contended that the facility should have been allowed until they were informed of the withdrawal. However, the Department argued that the relevant date is the withdrawal order date, not the date of awareness by the appellants.

Effective Date of Notification:
The appellant's counsel cited various case laws to support their argument, emphasizing that Trade Notices cannot operate retrospectively. The Tribunal distinguished the cases cited, stating that the Asstt. Collector's order was based on detailed reasons, not the Trade Notice. The Tribunal clarified that the withdrawal order date is crucial in such cases, and if the order was issued before the specified withdrawal date and made public, the appellants cannot claim benefits until they were informed of the order.

Interpretation of Relevant Case Laws:
The Tribunal analyzed the case laws cited by the appellant's counsel, highlighting that reliance on Trade Notices for decision-making varies based on the context of each case. The Tribunal emphasized that the withdrawal of deemed credit facility was clearly stated in the order, and the impugned order did not rely on the Trade Notice for confirmation of the demand.

Applicability of Trade Notices:
The Tribunal noted that the Collector (Appeals) discussed the nature of the order under Rule 57G in detail, emphasizing that the withdrawal order was issued before the specified date, and its public availability negates the argument that the appellants should be allowed credit until they were informed of the order.

Nature of Order under Rule 57G:
The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, rejecting the appeal based on the understanding that the withdrawal of deemed credit provision was effective from 2-11-1987, as specified in the order, and not reliant on the Trade Notice. The Tribunal concluded that the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of deemed modvat credit beyond the withdrawal date specified in the order.