9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (5) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordering deemed transfer of the P.L.A. amount to RG-23 account and permit its deemed utilisation till 28-2-1986, especially when the Central Excise law does not provide for such deemed transfers, nor does the law permit any such relaxation. (ii) Whether the Hon ble CEGAT was correct in ordering crediting of an equivalent amount in the P.L.A. after effecting the deemed transfer, for further utilisation by the party, especially when, what can be credited to the P.L.A. is amount credited by cash/cheque in bank and all such credits are to be duly reconciled the accounting. (iii) Whether the Hon ble CEGAT was correct in ordering such deemed transfers and utilisation, which apart from not being supported by the Cen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gularise the mistake and for use of such amounts in the RG-23 Account for payment of duty. When this order was passed, Notification No. 201/79 was in force. They made the deposit of money in their P.L.A. as ordered by the Collector (Appeals) but instead of immediately transferring to their RG-23 Account the amount wrongly transferred to their P.L.A. from their RG-23 Account earlier, they wrote to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Sambalpur Division vide their letter of 16/19-10-1985 for grant of permission for such transfer. Such a permission was not necessary as the Collector (Appeals) had already directed them under his Order-in-Appeal cited above to transfer the appropriate amount from their P.L.A. to their RG-23 Account for uti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... off amount to RG-23A Account is permissible from 1-3-1986 only in respect of commodities specified in Notification No. 177/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986. The inputs in question were not covered in the said Notification. Only from 1-3-1987 was their final product, Cement, covered under the MODVAT Scheme. By that time, the inputs in question, slag had become exempt from duty. Hence it was contended that the order of Collector (Appeals) permitting transfer of Credit from erstwhile RG-23 Account to the RG-23A. Account is not correct. 2B. The appeal was decided by this Tribunal holding that the order of Collector (Appeals) was not correct as a transfer of Credit lying unutilised in the RG-23 Account to the RG-23A Account was not permissible under R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should be deemed to have been cleared against such amount in RG-23. The effect of the transfer of Credit from P.L.A. to RG-23 and adjusting the clearances of the appropriate quantity of Cement against such deemed transfer of Credit to RG-23 would release the equivalent amount in P.L.A. which will be available now after the said transfer adjustment is made. This will enable them to get the benefit due to them in terms of the appellate order of August, 1985. It has been contended in the Reference Application that the Tribunal s Order is beyond the provisions of law and the procedure envisaged is not supported by Statute. As a creature of the Statute, the Tribunal cannot go beyond the provisions to extend the benefit. It is, further, urged th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransfer of unutilised balance to RG 23A Account for Modvat Credit in appropriate cases. That transfer was held to be inadmissible by us but we supported the finding of the Collector (Appeals) for grant of permission to utilise the Credit in question by arriving at that finding by a different approach. We held that the transfer of the amount is to be effectuated by an accounting exercise, as indicated by us. We had observed that it was an accounting irregularity or mistake ab initio, and it has got to be regularised and reversed only in the manner indicated by us and not by wiping it out, as done by the Assistant Collector. As pointed out already, the irregularity committed by the respondents was in transferring the Credit taken by them in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount. Their committing a wrong by transferring the Credit amount to their P.L.A. and then utilising it instead of utilising it straightaway from the RG-23 itself had to be set right. As they were made to deposit the amount once again in the P.L.A. and thereafter transfer the amount to RG-23 and then utilise the latter for payment of duty, they should be permitted to use the same for such payment of duty through RG-23 Account which was permissible upto 28-2-1986. This is what was permitted. This was not against any provision of law. It is a question of accounting procedure. We had relied upon the Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner reported in 1991 (55) E.L.T. 437. The differe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
