9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sposed of by this common order. 2. The appellants who are registered SSI Units, engaged inter alia in the manufacture of auto parts, solenoid valves, etc. were availing of the benefit of Notification 175/86 as amended. They filed requisite declarations under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 to avail of mod vat credit under Rule 57A and started to pay Central Excise duty at the rate of 10% BED = 5% SED on BED under the notification. As per Notification 175/86, a manufacturer may start to pay duty at concessional rate (normal rate minus 10% ad valorem subject to minimum of 5% ad valorem) on the first clearances of value upto Rs. 75 lakhs, if he avails credit of duty paid on specified inputs to be used in the manufacture of specifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en filed to that effect. The mere fact that the appellants paid duty at the concessional rate of 10% does not mean that they would be disentitled to the benefit of para a(ii) of the notification. Mere filing of the declaration under Rule 57G cannot take away a benefit otherwise admissible under the notification which prescribes only two rates (i) concessional rate of duty of 10% or (ii) nil rate and para (a)(ii) does not exclude para (a)(i). The appellants are otherwise eligible to the benefit of notification as they are SSI units whose clearance value did not exceed the prescribed limit in the preceding financial year and their products were specified in the Table appended to the notification and hence, all the conditions for applicability ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional argument of Shri Willingdon is that during the relevant period, no declaration under Rule 57G was filed as the appellants were not availing modvat credit and, therefore, no question of suppression or misdeclaration arises and the RT 12 returns filed clearly show that the appellants have not taken modvat credit. The learned DR submits that as the appellants went on paying concessional rate of duty wilfully without availing of modvat credit with intent to misutilise modvat scheme. This action on their part amounts to suppression and the extended period of limitation is accordingly available to the Department. We find that the allegation that M/s. Rotex Manufacturers and Engg. (Guj.) P. Ltd. had intentionally removed excisable goods at c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
