9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (2) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for which they use lime as one of the raw materials. During the material period, lime was exempt from duty of excise under the aforesaid notification. The manufacturers of lime had paid duty on the product at the time of clearance to the present appellants. Credit of that duty was taken by the appellants. That credit was proposed to be denied by the department, by show cause notice issued to the party, on the aforesaid ground. The proposal was contested by the party. The Commissioner, who adjudicated the dispute, upheld the department s view and denied the Modvat credit. Hence the present appeal. 4. Ld. Advocate, Shri A.C. Jain submits that the issue involved in the appeal stands covered in favour of the appellants by this Tribunal s deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ady Industries (supra), the Bench held that such credit could not be disallowed on the ground that no duty of excise was payable in law on the input at the material time. On a perusal of the decision in Eveready Industries (supra), I find the ratio of that decision in the following sentence contained in para 1.4 of that Order :- The authorities below have no power to disallow the part of duty paid on inputs as Modvat credit on the ground that such duty was not payable........ It appears to me that this ratio has been correctly followed by the Bench in Industrial Cables (supra). The Supreme Court s decision cited by ld. DR has also been examined. The facts of that case lie in a different matrix. The assessee in that case was engaged in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the raw materials voluntarily so as to enjoy the benefit of an Exemption notification in respect of their final products. The facts of the Supreme Court case revolves singularly around one manufacturer whereas, in the instant case, two manufacturers are involved the manufacturer of lime paying duty on his product, though exempt, and the manufacturer of aluminium products taking Modvat credit of that duty and availing the same for payment of duty on their final products. The latter situation is certainly permissible under Rule 57A as held by this Bench in Industrial Cables (supra). 7. In the result, it is held that the Modvat credit of Rs. 27,994/- was lawfully taken by the appellants on lime. As regards penalty, I note that a penalty of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
