9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the export goods the benefit of input stage credit should not have been availed of by the exporters under Rule 57A. The department noticed that the appellants were availing the benefits under the aforesaid scheme and also availed input stage credit in respect of such export goods. In the impugned order the Assistant Commissioner has stated that an amount of Rs. 7,23,84,098/- was worked out as per the Board s formula (vide Madras Collectorate Trade Notice No. 5/97, dated 13-1-1997) being the Modvat credit to be reversed and Rs. 3,66,62,598/- as the interest thereon. It is seen that the appellants worked out the credit reversible for the material period as Rs. 1,37,03,200/- and interest at Rs. 41,94,595/- and paid on 30-1-1997 an amount of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... helpful in distinguishing the inputs issued for exported goods under DEEC Scheme . He has also stated that they have not produced records to substantiate their claim for reversal on actual basis. Thus, he held that the appellants have not complied with the scheme for permitting reversal of Modvat credit availed by exporters of goods under VABAL in contravention of the conditions detailed in Customs Public Notice 5/97, dated 8-1-1997 and Madras Central Excise Commissionerate Trade Notice No. 5/97, dated 13-1-1997. He concluded that therefore no certificate of compliance was issued to them. 3.1 In the grounds of appeal, the appellants pleaded that the pattern of manufacture in MRF is entirely different from that of other tyre manufacturers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner has so far issued any order. 3.2 The appellants further strongly put up their defence that during the relevant period, they have been exporting their finished goods namely, tyres, tubes and flaps only under bond; that according to Rule 57F(4), in respect of exports under bond, Modvat credit is permissible to be utilised towards payment of duty of excise on similar final products cleared for home consumption on payment of duty; that this was what they did during the relevant period; that therefore notwithstanding Clause (v) of Customs Notification No. 203/92, the appellants cannot be compelled to reverse the Modvat credit, be it VABAL exports or QBAL exports; that therefore the lower authority erred in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion against MRF vis-a-vis other tyre companies, that the amount actually reversed by them towards Modvat and interest were also based on the Board s formula cited by the lower authority, except that the Modvat on compounded rubber has deduced to the input stage credit, that during the hearing before the lower authority on 26-5-1997 submitted actual quantities of imports made under various licenses of VABAL together with copies of VABAL import licences and other export particulars; that the lower authority has not considered these submissions at all; that the Customs department accepts the same norms in respect of QBAL imports, consequent to which there is no prohibition of Modvat availment in the QBAL Notification 204/92; that the Assistan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r which was subsequently transferred to their Tiruvottiyur factory on payment of duty is removed from the books (RG 23) of Kottayam Unit and shifted to their Tiruvottiyur factory, in the place of the credit taken by Tiruvottiyur factory on such duty paid compounded rubber, the excise department would be taking the same amount of credit twice, for the purpose of calculation of Modvat reversal in both the factories. They further pleaded that the lower authority has not provided any worksheet as to the quantification of the reversible amount arrived at by him. They have also pleaded that the Assistant Commissioner has not given them effective hearing. 5.1 I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the elaborate submissions of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Exim Policy. 5.4. The order-in-original also admits that the appellants have reversed the credit based on this input stage credit plus the interest thereon. On the above principles, the Assistant Commissioner is directed to re-work the entire demand, after affording the appellants a reasonable opportunity to be heard. It is also seen from the impugned order that though the Assistant Commissioner has taken refuge under the formula given by the CBEC to work out the amount of duty to be reversed, yet, he has, nowhere in the order-in-original discussed the manner in which the same has been done. 6. In view of the above, the issue has to go back to the original authority for de novo consideration in the light of my above observati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
