9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (12) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to whether the item and Chapter sub-heading given in the declaration filed by the respondents under Rule 57G was applicable to the inputs received by them from the manufacturer. The respondents had declared the item as Mineral Based Special Purpose Oil falling under Chapter Heading 2710. However, the invoice under the cover of which the goods were received classified the goods under Chapter 3404. The respondents had contended that the description of the oil given in the invoice was a brand name. The oil itself was being used in slotting, a manufacturing process in the production of their final product. The Commissioner (Appeals) - relying on the Tribunal decision in C.C.E. v. Larsen and Toubro - 1997 (94) E.L.T. 624 - allowed the credit o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect sub-heading in the declaration filed under Rule 57G would be sufficient grounds for denying Modvat credit. He therefore, prays for setting aside of the impugned order allowing credit to the respondents. 3. Ld. Counsel Shri K.K. Anand, appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents had in their declaration stated that the item on which credit was to be taken was Mineral based special purposes oil which clearly falls under Chapter 27. The Chapter sub-heading given in the declaration was 27.10. However, the documents showing the receipt of the inputs from the manufacturer showed the item as falling under Chapter Heading 34.04. Respondents had explained before the Assistant Commissioner that the item described in the invo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectronics Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E.- 1997 (89) E.L.T. 205 4. The submissions and the case law have been considered by me. I find that the issue for consideration lies within a narrow compass. Whereas the respondents had filed a declaration mentioning the inputs under a certain Chapter sub-heading, the invoice on the basis of which credit had been taken showed the classification of the inputs under a different heading. The Department contends that in terms of Rule 57G where the tariff description/heading under the declaration is at variance with the description of the inputs/tariff entry, the provisions of Rule 57G are contravened and therefore Modvat credit claimed by the respondents would become inadmissible. In the facts of the case I find th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
