9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (10) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct of the inputs received between 1-3-1986 and 31-3-1986 in terms of Rule 57H of the Central Excise Rules. The Assistant Collector, while allowing the benefit partially, held that inputs in respect of which duty was paid prior to 31-1-1986 -the credit could not be allowed in terms of Rule 57H(2) of the Central Excise Rules. On appeal, the learned Collector (Appeals) examined the issue in the light of the claim made in terms of Rule 57H(2) and held that the lower authority s order was maintainable. The issue that falls for consideration before us is whether the appellants are eligible for the benefit of MODVAT credit in respect of the products which had suffered duty prior to 31-1-1986. 2. The learned Advocate for the appellants submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... products which are cleared from the factory on or after the first day of March, 1987, and that no credit has been taken by the manufacturer in respect of such inputs under any other rule or notification : Provided that such inputs are not used in the manufacture of final product which is exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon or is chargeable to nil rate of duty. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 57A, no credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of a final product (other than those inputs in respect of which credit of duty was allowable under any rule or notification prior to the 1st day of March, 1986, when used in the final products) shall be allowed if duty has been paid on the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecision of this Tribunal in the case of Poddar Projects Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, reported in 1988 (38) E.L.T. 482 (Tribunal) and drew our attention to para 5 of the said order, which for convenience of reference is reproduced below: 5. A scrutiny of Rule 57H(2) extracted above would show that notwithstanding Rule 57A no credit of duty on the inputs used in the manufacture of final products shall be allowed, if such duty had been paid on or before 31-1-1986 other than those inputs in respect of which credit of duty was allowable under any Rule or Notification prior to 1-3-1986. In the instant case the inputs in question were allowed proforma credit under Rule 56A prior to 1-3-1986 and so the inputs would stand excluded from t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertained that this credit was allowable irrespective of the fact whether the appellants actually availed of the credit or not the appellants case would fall within the exception of Rule 57H(2). We observe that this aspect has not been examined in the impugned order. Notwithstanding that since it has been established and it is not contradicted by Revenue that the appellants products fall within the ambit of Rule 56A, we hold that the benefit as pleaded in terms of Rule 57H(2) would be available to the appellants. The appellants as it is have been allowed the benefit in respect of the inputs which were lying in stock as on 1-3-1986 and which were received till 31-3-1986 and the appellants claim was turned down only in cases where duty had b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
