9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (8) TMI 143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting such stocks lying in a factory, customs area or a warehouse as are clearly recognisable as being non-duty paid may be deemed to be duty paid and the credit of duty in respect of the said inputs may be allowed at such rate and subject to such conditions as the Central Government may direct, without production of the documents evidencing the payment of duty. It is clear from this provision that the Central Government has been empowered to specify the date from which this facility will be applicable. Once this date is specified, it has to be effected from that date only irrespective of when this is communicated to the trade or general public. This is not like a notification where no date is specified. If however, a particular notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herwise confirmed and the appeals are disposed of accordingly." 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in General Fabrication Work. For fabrication of these items the appellant used the M.S. Sheets and claimed deemed Modvat credit under the Government of India directives which was circulated under the Delhi Collectorate Trade Notice No. 33-C.E.(2)-II-25/86, dated 16-4-1986. The said deemed Modvat credit was claimed by the appellant on M.S. Sheets purchased from the open market during the period 4-11-1987 to 5-1-1988. However, the Ministry of Finance under their order F. No. 332/30/87-TRU, dated 2-11-1987, withdrew the facility of deemed Modvat credit on M.S. Sheets w.e.f. 2-11-1987. The said deemed Modva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decision in the case of Gokaldas Harbhagwan Das v. Collector of Customs, Bombay reported in 1987 (29) E.L.T. 379 and in the case of Gulab Impex Enterprises Ltd. v. Collector of Customs reported in 1990 (46) E.L.T. 109 (T). 4. Shri B.D. Bhagat, the ld. JDR appearing for the respondent reiterated the findings of the lower authorities. 5. Heard the submissions of both sides. On careful consideration of the arguments, I find that the ld. Counsel for the appellant cited and relied upon the ratio of the cases which appear to be apt and fully applicable to the facts of the present case. The Hon ble Tribunal in the case of Gokaldas Harbhagwan Das v. Collector of Customs, Bombay [Paras 27 to 31] had held :- ******* This decision of the T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
