1997 (2) TMI 250

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ment. Shri Ram Sharan, JDR, appearing for the Revenue submitted that the Collector (Appeals) erred in holding that the demand was barred by time. He said that demand in the instant case pertained to the period 5/87 and 6/87 when there was no time limit prescribed under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for the recovery of wrongly availed Modvat credit. Relying upon the judgment of the Gu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ip-breaking scrap on which modvat is claimed is covered under sub-heading 7215.00. Non-mention of sub-heading, cannot take away substantive right of the appellant. Besides this, there are other connecting documents like the Classification list and gate passes available for reference and removing doubt, if any. As regards the SCN being time barred, the view of Astt. Collector that there was no spec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6 CEGAT which is relevant to this case. I proceed to accept the appeal by setting aside the impugned order and by allowing consequential relief, if otherwise admissible. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. 4. The Collector (Appeals) has analysed that the department was not correct in denying the Modvat credit on the ground that no declaration had been filed. On the other hand the declaration .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X