9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (10) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of duty on their final products. They received certain quantities of the said inputs during the period 1st December, 1988 to 31st December, 1989 and took credit of Basic Excise Duty as also Special Excise duty. They took the credit initially in terms of the deemed credit order issued by the Central Government. Subsequently they received certificates issued by Hindustan Zinc Ltd. mentioning the rate of Basic Excise Duty and Special Excise Duty. Show cause notice was issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise to them asking them to state why the amount of Rs. 1,33,769.54 wrongly utilised as Modvat credit should not be recovered under Rule 57-I of the Rules. After receipt of their reply and granting personal hearing, the Assistant Collec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccording to such certificates and the same was in order. the second ground of defence taken is that the show cause notice was barred by time for the credit taken before August 1989. There was no allegation of any suppression or mis-statement. This plea of limitation was, however, rejected by both the lower authorities holding that the assessment being provisional, time bar will not apply. We do not agree. The notice was issued under Rule 57-I which at the material time required that where credit had been taken on account of an error, omission or misconstruction notice may be served within six months from the date of such credit requiring the manufacturer to show cause why such credit should not be disallowed and where the credit had already ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtakings were being accepted as duty paying documents. Some of the disputes which had arisen in this regard had travelled upto the Tribunal and these had been decided taking the view that the withdrawal of the facility allowed in respect of such certificates issued by Public Sector Undertakings cannot apply to past cases. The letter F. No. 267/17/78-CX. 8, dated 19-2-1988 issued by the Central Board of Excise Customs refer to such certificates endorsed by the first addressee and spelt out that they cannot be further endorsed in favour of another person for enabling that person to avail Modvat benefit. This would go to show that the person to whom the certificate is issued regarding supplies to him can avail Modvat credit on such certifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
