9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (10) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal No. 270/CE/CHD/91, dated 25-2-1991 of Collector (Appeals), Central Excise, Chandigarh. 2. The respondents were availing Modvat credit on R.B. oil under Rule 57K read with Notification No. 192/87, dated 12-8-1987 and vide amending Notification No. 17/88, dated 1-3-1988 the rate of credit was enhanced from Rs. 320/- PMT to Rs. 640/- PMT. The respondents we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... puts and therefore, they are entitled to take additional credit in their RG 23AII accounts on all such stocks lying with them as on 1-3-1988 because of Notification No. 17/88 which enhanced the rate of 320/- PMT. to Rs. 640/- PMT. In support of his contention, he cited the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Mysore Lac Paint Works Ltd. [1991 (52) E.L.T. 590 (Tri.)] and stated that credit of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oil to be used in the manufacture of soap. It is not the case here that duty was paid actually on such rice bran oil and differential duty was subsequently paid. The credit claim is governed by the provisions of Rule 57K read with notification issued thereunder. Rule 57K allows grant of modvat credit for use of inputs in the manufacture of final products. Sub-rule (2) to Rule 57A permits allowing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dy taken into account does not lapse [see Union of India v. Modern Mills Ltd. reported in 1994 (72) E.L.T. 246 (Kar.)]. Similarly where the rate is increased the credit of duty lying in accounts cannot be inflated through additions of differential credit in respect of stocks lying in the factory. There is no warrant for inflating the credit in this manner. As I pointed out earlier the notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat utilization of credit at higher rate with effect from 1-3-1988 will not be allowed. Collector (Appeals) perhaps appears to have confused order of Asstt. Collector with rate of utilisation of credit, which as held earlier, was not what Asstt. Collector said in his order. 4. Asstt. Collector s order was confined only to disallowing differential credit on stock lying as on 1-3-1988. 5. I th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
