1998 (8) TMI 227 - Commissioner - Central Excise

Issues Involved:
1. Denial of Modvat credit due to non-production of original duty paying documents.
2. Availing credit after six months from the date of issue of duty paying documents.
3. Availing credit on the original copy of the invoice instead of the duplicate.
4. Denial of credit on capital goods not used for producing or processing of any goods.
5. Eligibility of specific items as capital goods for credit.
6. Imposition of penalties.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Denial of Modvat Credit Due to Non-Production of Original Duty Paying Documents:
The lower authority denied Modvat credit on the ground that the appellants did not produce original duty paying documents. The appellants argued that the original GP1 was sent to the original supplier and collected back on return of the re-conditioned inputs. They produced relevant Gate Passes and the Superintendent allowed re-credit after defacing the same. They relied on the Tribunal's decision in M/s. Rathi Alloys and Steel Ltd., where it was held that credit must be allowed if inputs are returned to the supplier for repairs and received back under a Gate Pass containing a cross-reference to the original Gate Pass. The judgment confirmed that the denial of credit for re-conditioned goods was incorrect as the inputs were cleared on payment of duty and received back without payment of duty.

2. Availing Credit After Six Months from the Date of Issue of Duty Paying Documents:
The appellants submitted that the time limit for taking credit was introduced prospectively by Notification No. 28/95-C.E. (N.T.), dated 29-6-1995. The judgment held that the denial of Modvat credit was not in order as the six-month limit prescribed under Rule 57G(2) does not apply to capital goods. Therefore, the credit of duty on capital goods taken after six months from the date of issue of duty paying documents was deemed admissible.

3. Availing Credit on the Original Copy of the Invoice Instead of the Duplicate:
The appellants contended that the duplicate copy of the invoice was lost in transit and they applied for taking credit on the basis of the original copy of the invoice, but no permission was granted. The judgment found that credit of duty is admissible on the original invoice if the duplicate is lost, aligning with the Tribunal's decision in M/s. Rathi Alloys and Steel Ltd.

4. Denial of Credit on Capital Goods Not Used for Producing or Processing of Any Goods:
The lower authority disallowed credit on certain capital goods, arguing they were not used for producing or processing any goods. The appellants argued that items like electric wires, cables, UPS systems, and pumps were essential for the manufacturing process. The judgment concluded that most of the goods, excluding Corocretin B1-Compound-A and Braided Gland packing, fall under the category of capital goods as defined under Rule 57Q, and thus credit of duty is admissible.

5. Eligibility of Specific Items as Capital Goods for Credit:
The judgment provided a detailed analysis of various items, confirming the eligibility of items such as PVC cables, SS316 Trough, Metallic Hose, Electric Motor, Refractories, Cap Gasket, FLP Push Button, Profil synthetic woven fabric, Plunger Pump, Speed Drive, Hydraulic Nut Cracker, PTFE Line Fittings, Storage Tank, Porous Tiles, Taflon Hose, and Impeller Agitator as capital goods. However, Corocretin B1-Compound-A and Braided Gland packing were deemed consumables, not capital goods, and thus not eligible for credit. Additionally, Tor Steel was not considered capital goods as it is used for civil construction work.

6. Imposition of Penalties:
The judgment stated that it was not a fit case for imposing penalties. In disputes regarding the admissibility of credit of duty on inputs, penalties are not warranted. Consequently, the penalties imposed by the lower authority were set aside.

Conclusion:
The appeals were partially allowed, and the orders passed by the lower authority were modified to the extent that credit of duty on capital goods was deemed admissible, except for Corocretin B1-Compound-A, Braided Gland packing, and Tor Steel. The imposition of penalties was also set aside.

← Previous Next →