9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (10) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... redit should not be denied on account of technical lapses. It has to be seen therefore whether non-declaration of steel castings can be considered as only a technical lapse in the background of their having filed classification list for that product which has been approved by the department, and their inputs remaining the same for which there was already declaration. The only lapse is that instead of mentioning Chapter Heading 7206.90 they continued with their earlier declaration under Chapter 7224. While Chapter 7224 deals with other alloy steel in ingots or other primary form...". Chapter Heading 7206.90 deals with non alloy steel in ingots or other primary form . I would observe that the purpose of the declaration of the inputs and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chemicals Ltd. 1992 (59) E.L.T. 168 C.C.E. v. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. Relying on the above said decisions, he pointed out that when the department fully knew the activity of the assessee, the technical lapses by the assessee is not sufficient to deny the credit. 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. In this case, the Assistant Commissioner had denied the benefit to the appellant. In denying the benefit, he observed in Paras 7 to 9 as follows : The party in their declarations filed on 10-8-1992 and 07. 12-5-1992 (acknowledged on 20-7-1992 and 17-8-1992), have furnished the description of the final products as follows : (8) IRON STEEL Other alloy steel in ingots or other primary f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has been utilised for payment of duty and hence the goods cleared by the party based on the ineligible credit have been cleared without payment of duty. I find, therefore, that the party will need to both reverse the credit as well as pay the correct duty on the final products cleared utilising the ineligible credit. I find the arguments of the party in this case are unacceptable." 5. But the Commissioner (Appeals) stated there was a classification list filed and the department knew the activity of the appellant, but the filing of the classification list is not a substitute for the filing of a declaration. This is the view taken by the Tribunal in the decision reported in 1995 (80) E.L.T. 219 in the case of Friends Wire Industries v. C. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
