9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (11) TMI 186X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... H. They made three applications dated 1-4-1986, 7-4-1986 and 11-9-1986. 1.2 On scrutiny by the Assistant Commissioner, the credit for the inputs lying in stock as aforesaid or received by them during the aforesaid period in respect of the application dated 1-4-1986, was allowed by the Assistant Commissioner. However, the said Assistant Commissioner disallowed the applications dated 7-4-1986 and 11-9-1986. 1.3 On appeal, the lower appellate authority, however, allowed the appeal on the ground that even though the respondents would be not entitled to the benefit of Rule 57H, but they would be entitled to the benefit of deemed Modvat credit in terms of Ministry s letter F. No. B-22/5/86-TRU, dated 7-4-1986. It was held by the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned JDR has pointed out that in respect of two of the items at Serial Nos. 10 and 11 of the application dated 7-4-1986, the goods were imported in 1985 and the counter-veiling duty, therefore, must have been paid before 31-1-1986. Relying on this evidence, the Assistant Commissioner had disallowed the benefit on the remaining items as well. Apart from this, learned JDR also submits that if the dates of purchase of the other items were also seen as referred to in the impugned order of the Assistant Commissioner, it would be reasonable to infer that the goods must have been imported prior to 31-1-1986 inasmuch as some of the dates themselves in respect of purchases made by the respondents herein, were within a few days of 31-1-1986 while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry s Circular dated 7-4-1986 (as amended) is an independent Circular issued under Rule 57G and no condition of Rule 57H should be read therein. Since no cut-off date had been provided in the said Circular, therefore, even if the duty had been paid prior to 31-1-1986, still they were entitled to the benefit of deemed Modvat credit so long as the other conditions of the Ministry s Circular dated 7-4-1986 were satisfied. He submits that production of the duty paying documents are not at all necessary whenever the goods are purchased from outside and which are covered by the Ministry s Circular dated 7-4-1986. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions. So far as the remaining amount of Rs. 98,554.12 is concerned, we observe that Ministr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stant Commissioner had merely denied the benefit on the basis of collateral evidence in respect of `Nickel figuring at Serial Nos. 10 and 11 of the Chart appended to the application dated 7-4-1986. Before the benefit can be disallowed, enquiry must be made by the Revenue whether the goods purchased by the respondents after 31-1-1986 were duty paid on or before 31-1-1986 and then they have to examine - can the Modvat credit be disallowed to the respondents? Otherwise, it cannot be disallowed. For this purpose, we remand the matter to the adjudicating authority to decide the case in respect of the purchases made after 31-1-1986, after making an enquiry whether the duty on these purchases had been paid on or before 31-1-1986. 7. As regards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
