9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (11) TMI 734X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. The prayer in the application is for dispensation with the condition of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 60,77,22,197/- confirmed against the appellant/applicant by denying them the Modvat credit availed by them during the period April 1994 to March, 1999 in respect of the countervailing duty paid on imported kerosene oil which the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount to manufacture. With the extension of the Modvat scheme to their final product, the applicants filed a declaration under the provisions of Rule 57G which was duly acknowledged by their jurisdictional proper officer. He clarifies that inasmuch as the quantum of credit availed by them was higher than the duty paid by them on their final product, the Revenue took an objection that the activit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing to their own interpretation and as such, has mis-declared the imported kerosene as an input with sole intention to avail the credit irregularly. He submits that when the entire facts were before the Revenue, there was no justification for invoking a longer period of limitation against the appellants. 4. We have also heard Shri A.K. Chattopadhyay, ld. JDR for the Revenue who reiterates the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ants on their final product. At this stage, we take note of the latest decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Himalayan Co-operative Milk Products Union Ltd. etc. [2000 (122) E.L.T. 327 (S.C.)] dated 7-11-2000 wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has observed that the benefits meant to be provided to the manufacturer are not to be defeated nor those which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t credit, the objection should have been raised immediately after filing the declaration. There is no justification for the Revenue to wait for five years to raise the objection and consequent demand of duty. As such, prima facie, we are of the view that the appellant has a good case on the point of limitation. The stay petition is allowed unconditionally. As the huge revenue is involved, we fix t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
