9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (9) TMI 202X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit under MODVAT Scheme under Rule 57A of Central Excise Rules, 1944. After filing the declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 they received runners & risers weighing 37.15 MT against gate-pass showing classification of goods under Heading No. 7206.90 of the Central Excise Tariff. They availed MODVAT credit amounting to Rs. 15,867.50 as basic excise duty and Rs. 793.38 as special excise duty. They were served with a notice by the Assistant Collector asking them to show why credit availed by them should not be dis-allowed since they had not specifically mentioned 'runners & risers' as input in the declaration filed by them under Rule 57G, covering goods falling under Tariff Heading 7206.90. In his order dated 30-1-1990 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ince in the declaration filed under Rule 57G runners and risers had not been specifically mentioned. He argued that the declaration of the description of the inputs intended to be used by the manufacturer was mandatory in terms of Rule 57G, and there was no force in the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) that the mentioning of the relevant tariff heading in the declaration was sufficient. In this regard he placed reliance on the Tribunal's decision in the case of Paro Food Products v. CCE reported in 1988 (38) E.L.T. 332. 3. On behalf of the respondents the learned advocate Shri K.K. Anand stated that in the declaration filed under Rule 57G the inputs were described as ingot falling under Tariff Heading 7206.90 which covers "Iron and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the scope and ambit of Rule 57G(2) the Tribunal has in a number of decisions taken the view that the manufacturer who fails to file a declaration under Rule 57G specifying the particular input would not be entitled to take credit of duty paid on the inputs received by him under the MODVAT Scheme. In the case of Paro Food Products v. CCE reported in 1988 (38) E.L.T. 332 the Tribunal held that availment of MODVAT credit for metal containers was not permissible when the declaration filed under Rule 57G indicated packing materials. The relevant extract from the Tribunal's decision is reproduced below :- "We have carefully considered the submissions made before us. We are not able to accede to the plea of the learned Consultant in regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
