9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (10) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finished product came to be exempted. The learned Collector (Appeals) in his order has followed the ratio of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Premier Tyres Ltd. reported in 1992 (62) E.L.T. 104. 2. The learned JDR for the Department Shri Arulswamy has pleaded that there were divergent views between the South Regional Bench and East Regional Bench. The view of the South Regional Bench was that taking of Modvat credit was one legal event while the utilisation of Modvat credit was a separate legal event and if Modvat credit was taken correctly at the time of receipt of the same in terms of Modvat Rules and was also utilised correctly at the relevant time the subsequent event of exemption of a notified finished prod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . This Bench of the Tribunal has held that where the exemption notification came to be issued subsequent to the receipt of the inputs the ratio of the decision of the Larger Bench would not be applicable for reversal of the Modvat credit and the avenue open for recovery in respect of the inputs which were relatable to the goods cleared under exemption notification issued subsequently would have to be found within the frame work of the Modvat Rules. So far as the inputs which might be lying in stock as such the rules available for the purpose as set out in this order has been indicated to be Rule 57F. However the order of the Tribunal is silent as to the fate of Modvat credit in respect of the inputs which are contained in the finished produ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the right for taking Modvat credit is to be curtailed in respect of the inputs to the extent of inputs that might be used in the exempted goods cleared under the exemption notification in force at the time of receipt of the goods. This in our view is in conformity with the provisions of Rule 57C. Rule 57C envisages that no Modvat credit is available in respect of notified finished product which may be exempt. When there is no specific provision for recovery in case a notified finished product is exempted subsequently the question of credit correctly taken being recovered does not arise when there is no specific provision in this regard. We observe that the 3-Member Bench of the Tribunal have taken a view that the ratio of the Kirloskar Oi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
