9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal before the Tribunal. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant is as SSI Unit engaged in the manufacture of P or P medicaments. The appellants during the period 1994-95 were availing the benefit of Modvat credit after exhausting the exemption available to them under small scale exemption notification. During the financial year 1995-96, again they opted for this small scale exemption Notification No. l/93-C.E., w.e.f. 1-4-1995. As on 1-4-1995, the appellants were having stock of inputs, either as such or as contained in the final product on which they had availed Modvat credit and had utilised the same towards payment of duty on clearance effected prior to 1-4-1995. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit in respect of the inputs lying in stock as on 1-4-1995 and since they had reversed only an amount of Rs. 46,512.04, the appellants deposited the balance amount of credit of Rs. 89,532.34 vide TR-6 challan dated 6-11-1995. Subsequently, they claimed that since the inputs lying in stock as on 1-4-1995 were lying in stock as on 11-6-1995 also when they reverted back to Modvat scheme, they are entitled to take Modvat credit in respect of such inputs in terms of Rule 57H. Such Modvat credit claimed by them amounted to Rs. 86,902.54. 4. The Asstt. Commr. of Central Excise has denied this Modvat credit on the ground that the appellants were required to reverse back the Modvat credit in respect of the inputs lying in stock as on 1-4-1995, whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilable to the assessee. The simplest way for the appellants was to pay back the duty at the time of switching over to exemption notification and to claim the benefit of the Modvat credit in respect of the inputs lying in stock as such on the date of switching back to Modvat scheme. However, in the instant case, I find that instead of depositing the entire amount of Modvat credit availed by them in respect of the inputs lying in stock as on 1-4-1995 itself, the appellants had paid back the same amount in piecemeal. An amount of Rs. 46,000/- (approx.) has been paid back at the time of clearance of the final product on various dates, at nil rate of duty by calculating the same equivalent to Modvat credit taken on the inputs contained on such f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts have already availed of Modvat credit in respect of the inputs as on 1-4-1995 and has subsequently reversed back the same on 6-11-1995, the inputs do not have duty paid character and the Modvat credit in respect of the same inputs subsequently in terms of Rule 57H cannot be allowed. Such reasoning, in my view, is not sustainable at all as the fact of taking of credit initially and reversing the same subsequently does not make the inputs of non-duty paid character as no bar can be imposed in availment of credit in respect of the same inputs. As observed by the Tribunal in the above referred case, the credit originally taken was reversed on the manufacturer opted for full exemption (though in the present case it was reversed at much later ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
