9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly cleared for export and subsequently on diversion for home consumption had suffered duty. There is no dispute about the goods having suffered duty. The learned lower authority has denied the appellants the benefit of the modvat credit on the interpretation of provision of Rule 57E. The learned lower authority has held in the impugned order as under : - It is contended in the application that (i) the letter referred to in the order-in-original is not a specified and valid document as per Rule 57G wherein, it has been specified that the AR 1, GP, Bill of Entry or any other document as may be prescribed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs are the only documents for the purpose of availing Modvat credit and (ii) Taking of credit of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds, were originally cleared for export under bond without payment of duty and no credit was allowed on the goods i.e. inputs under Rule 57A. Therefore, in my considered view, it cannot be viewed and held that credit has been allowed on the inputs under Rule 57A originally and subsequently varied, so as to bring and cover the transactions under Rule 57E of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and accordingly, the impugned transactions would definitely fall outside the purview of Rule 57E of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 3. The learned Counsel has pleaded that the original authority after verifying the duty paid nature of the goods had dropped the proceedings for reversal of the modvat credit and on an appeal filed by the department before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration the duty payable on the goods. He pleaded that once it is conceded that Rule 57E allows the taking of a differential credit consequent on the raising of the demand and payment of duty in respect of goods already cleared it does not matter whether originally the goods were cleared at nil rate of duty or on payment of some duty. His plea is that the learned lower auhority s interpretation is highly technical and very narrow. In the spirit of the modvat scheme which is a beneficial piece of legislation this interpretation is not acceptable. 4. The learned DR submitted that the certificate produced evidencing payment of duty is not a specified document and therefore, the credit could not have been taken in respect of the duty p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods from the factory could therefore only be vouchsafed by the certificate of the Range Supdt. and which has been done in the present case. There is also no averment from the revenue that the appellants are not otherwise eligible for the benefit of modvat credit by reason of any omission regarding compliance with any of the other modvat Rules incorporated in the modvat scheme. In view of the above, I hold agreeing with the learned Counsel that the appellants would be eligible to the benefit of modvat credit as they have established beyond any doubt that the goods had suffered duty and at the time when they were received the evidence of payment of duty existed. In this view, I set aside the order of the learned lower appellate authority a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
