9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1999 (7) TMI 213 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
- Discrepancy in the names on subsidiary gate passes and RG 23A register affecting duty credit eligibility. Analysis: The case involved the appellant, a manufacturer requiring various inputs for final products, who obtained supplies from persons different from those originally ordered. The evidence of duty payment on these inputs was through gate passes issued by manufacturers and subsidiary gate passes endorsed by the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise. The dispute arose when the names on the subsidiary gate passes did not match those in the RG 23A register, leading the department to suspect duty non-payment. The appellant argued that the duty credit criteria were met as the inputs were used in manufacturing final products with duty paid. The Departmental Representative contended the lack of correlation between names raised doubts on duty payment authenticity, despite commercial practices allowing third-party supplies. The appellate authority acknowledged the commercial practice of indirect supply but emphasized the necessity of proving duty payment for availing Modvat credit. The judgment highlighted that the rules focused on the utilization of duty-paid inputs in manufacturing cleared goods. It was noted that the goods were received in the appellant's factory and covered by subsidiary gate passes, although discrepancies in names existed. The decision emphasized the importance of demonstrating duty payment through proper documentation for credit eligibility. The judgment set aside the previous order, allowing the appellant an opportunity to establish the duty payment conclusively within two months before the Assistant Commissioner. If the documents presented satisfy the Assistant Commissioner regarding duty payment and utilization, the credit shall be permitted. This decision underscored the significance of substantiating duty payment to avail credit, despite discrepancies in supplier names, ensuring compliance with Modvat procedure requirements.
|
