9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (9) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of detergent powder, among other products, and during the period in question - April, 1989 to June, 1989, the detergent powder was wholly exported to Russia. The appellants took Modvat credit of the duty paid on STPP and used the same in the manufacture of detergent powder. The appellants filed the declaration with regard to the input - STPP, under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the `Rules'), on 12-6-1989. The Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise, Ghaziabad, who re-adjudicated the matter (after the matter was remanded back to him by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Ghaziabad vide Order-in-Appeal dated 26-2-1993), under his Order-in-Original dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 98 (99) E.L.T. 75 (T) = 1997 (18) RLT 499 (Tribunal). The Modvat credit was not to be disallowed on the ground of delay in filing declaration when there was no dispute about Modvat credit being otherwise available. (ii) Chamundi Steels Rerolling Mills v. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 563 (T) = 1995 (56) ECR 271 (Tribunal). The benefit of Modvat credit was not be denied merely on account of non-filing of declaration under Rule 57G. 4. In reply, Shri T.A. Arunachalam, JDR submitted that the requirement of filing of the declaration before availing of the benefit of Modvat credit was an essential feature of the Modvat scheme and that without a declaration it was not possible for the central excise off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... powder and further was a specified item under Rule 57A." The receipt and utilisation of STPP had been shown in the Form RG 23A Part-I for April, 1989, May, 1989 and June, 1989. The appellants have submitted before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) as under :- "It may be submitted that the detergent powder manufactured by them was only exported to Russia and such export took place on AR 4A and the Modvat credit taken on the inputs was duly recorded by the appellants in RG 23A Part I Register. Accordingly, being a central excise licencee, they had been filing their monthly RT 12 returns and alongwith such returns were enclosing the copies of their RG 23A Part I and Part II register, duty paying documents under which the credit h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit of Modvat credit should not be denied merely on account of non-filing of declaration under Rule 57G or maintenance of RG 23A". 9. The ld. Departmental Representative had referred to the Tribunal's decision in the case of P.G. Conductors v. Collector of Central Excise, Jaipur - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 336 (Tribunal). It was a case of un-declared final product - base aluminium wire of thickness 3.25 M.M. or more. It was admitted by the appellants in that case that base aluminium wire of thickness 3.25 M.M. or more was not declared by them as a finished product. On examination of the essential ingredients of Rule 57G of the Rules, the Tribunal (Single Member) observed that the requirement of the Rule was substantive and not procedural o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
