1999 (7) TMI 144

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. The respondent to this appeal manufactured goods in its factory at Roha. In July 1989, quantities of inputs used for manufacture of finished goods, semi-finished goods formulated out of some inputs and finished products manufactured out of such product, were washed away by flood water and lost. The department issued notice proposing recovery of Modvat credit t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to use in the manufacture of the final product. This finding is being challenged by the department in its appeal. 2. The Departmental Representative s contention is that the Modvat rule required that inputs on which credit has been taken must be utilized in the manufacture of finished product and since this has not been done, credit was not available on the inputs under Rule 57G. 3. The advoca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... anufacture of finished product. Therefore where an input is so used, credit cannot be denied notwithstanding that the final product comes into existence. The reasoning in these decisions has to be accepted. 5. The Departmental Representative attempts to argue that the input is not used till the final product emerges. We are not able to agree with this view. Rule 57F refers to use of inputs in or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X