9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (5) TMI 156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Rules, 1944 after debiting the MODVAT Credit taken in respect of the same. The appellants are stated to have received the said goods after reprocessing of the same and the MODVAT Credit on return of the same goods has not been allowed to them for the reason that the goods were not accompanied by duty paying documents as required under MODVAT Scheme. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellants pleaded that on receipt of the goods the appellants had taken MODVAT Credit on the goods on 12-1-1987 & 26-6-1987 and when the goods were returned on 4-8-1987. MODVAT Credit taken was debited in RG 23 Part II Register. He has pleaded that when their supplier returned the goods on 6-9-1987 under cover of a gate pass with cross-reference to the earlier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of any Bond under sub-rule 3(vi)(a) or without payment of duty, i.e. without debiting any amount from RG 23 Part II, but on execution of Bond under Rule 56A(7)(1). 4. The goods (raw materials) so returned may be subjected at the original suppliers' end to process covered either by Rule 173H or 173L. In the former case (Rule 173H) the reissue of the goods will be covered by gate passes showing payment of nil duty. However, since this nil duty gate pass will have a cross-reference with the original gate pass under which full duty had been paid, no difficulty should be experienced in allowing the credit once again in the RG 23 (Part II) of the receiver manufacturer, in case the receiver manufacturer had returned these raw materials under su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r home consumption or for export on payment of appropriate duty of excise or for export under bond, as if such inputs have been manufactured in the said factory: Provided that where the inputs are removed from the factory for home consumption on payment of duty of excise, such duty of excise shall in no case be less than the amount of credit that has been allowed in respect of such inputs under Rule 57A." 6. It is seen that the appellants had removed the goods by debiting the credit taken in respect of the same in RG 23 Part II Register while in fact the removal of the goods should have been by treating the goods as the manufacture of the appellants' factory, which means necessary procedure for filing of classification and price lists and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
