Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1994 (5) TMI 93

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... MODVAT Credit as admissible under the deemed Credit Order dated 7-4-1986 issued by the Government was not available to them in respect of the receipts of Iron Steel of Scrap and Ship Breakings for which they had taken the Credit after 29-8-1986. The said ground that the deemed Credit facility granted in respect of Waste and Scrap of Steel under Tariff Heading 72.03 and Ship Breaking Scrap under Tariff Heading 72.15 was withdrawn on and from 29-8-1986. The Credits in question by the appellants on such inputs after 29-8-1986 were not admissible. The Collector (Appeals) rejected the appellants contention that the deemed Credits availed after the entry in RG-23A Part-II after 29-8-1986 for the goods received prior to that date would be admi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Oil Industries v. Union of India; (iii) 1991 (56) E.L.T. 452 - Collector of Central Excise v. Sundar Engineering Industries; (iv) 1991 (56) E.L.T. 853 - Collector of Central Excise v. Premier Cables Co. Ltd. Shri Khaitan urged that as had been held in these decisions, the right accrued to them on the strength of the deemed Credit Order which was applicable to Iron and Steel Scrap when the same was received by them and this cannot be denied to them on the ground that they took such Credit in their RG-23A Part-II Account after the said items were removed from the deemed Credit Order. Further, in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Permier Cables Co. Ltd. the Tribunal had held that there is no provision specifying any time-limit f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in terms of money, it was not intended to be taken away or could not be taken away merely by rescinding the notification. The effect of the rescinded notification was that from the date on which the notification came to be rescinded the concerned manufacturers ceased to earn the benefit of Credit of money while manufacturing their final products with the help of the notified inputs but they were not deprived of their right to utilise the Credit of money which they had already earned validly. In the Sunder Engineering Industries case it was held that the Credit already availed of in respect of unutilised inputs was not to be required to be reversed by reason of the modification of the deemed Credit Order whereby the inputs in question becam .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nue to be available for utilisation after the amendment deleting the input/final product from the Scheme. Merely because the Credit was not already taken before such event (deletion of the item, Iron and Steel Scrap from the deemed Credit Order), it cannot be held that Credit was not available. Credit accrues to the manufacturer when the inputs are received and the provision applicable as on the date of such receipt would govern the situation. On that basis, in the present case the deemed Credit Order would be applicable to Waste and Scrap of Iron and Steel and Ship Breaking Scrap received by the appellants before the said items were removed from the deemed Credit Order and the fact that such Credit was actually taken by them in their RG-23 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ained to be completed. But this, as we have already held, is not a disentitling lapse as the records to the extent maintained support their case. In the light of the legal position about the accrual of Credit earned at a time when the same is admissible and its irreversibility in spite of the change of law from a date subsequent to such accrual as laid down in a number of decisions relating to Money Credit under Rules 57K to 57P of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 the case of the appellants is clearly established. The observations of the Honourable Gujarat High Court in Dipak Vegetable Oil Industries Ltd. v. Union of India which have been extracted earlier clearly support this view. Accordingly, the appeal is to be allowed and we order accord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates