9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (9) TMI 671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s filed an application under the provisions of Rule 57H of the Central Excise Rules seeking permission of the proper officer to avail the benefit of the Modvat credit in respect of the inputs lying in stock, either as such or in the shape of final product lying in the factory on 1-3-1994. In their application dt. 5-5-1994 filed before the Asstt. Commr. the appellant claimed the Modvat credit under transitional provision of Rule 57H in respect of the inputs lying at its factory in the shape of raw materials, or as contained in finished and semi-finished products, as contained in respect of goods under process and lying in the shape of usable soft waste. The said application so filed by the appellant was considered by the Asstt. Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g grounds:- (i) There is no provision for allowance of credit by the jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner w.e.f. 1-3-1997 under Rule 57H and, as such, in the instant case the credit has been allowed without the authority of law. (ii) In accordance with Rule 57H(1) read with Rule 57H(1)(b), the respondents were entitled to avail credit on this inputs utilised in the manufacture of their final products as were lying in stock on 15-9-1997 (0.8), the date of filing declaration under Rule 57G, but they were allowed to avail of credit on the inputs utilised in the manufacture of final products lying in stock as on 1-3-1994 (0.8) and, hence, not permissible. (iii) The input documents should not be more than 6 months old on the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lt, I hold that transitional credit, as allowed by the lower authority in his impugned order, is inadmissible. 5. The above order of the appellate authority is impugned before us. 6. We have heard Shri P.K. Das, ld. Adv. for the appellants and Shri T.K. Kar, ld. SDR, for the Revenue. 7. The appellant s main contention is that declaration filed on 27-3-1998 for claiming the benefit of Modvat credit in respect of the saleable waste lying in their stock as on 1-3-1994, was not an independent declaration but was in continuation of their earlier declaration made on 5-5-1994. As such the subsequent amended provisions of Rule 57H effective from 1-3-1997 were not be applied to them. However, we do not find any merits in the above contention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itically speaking the assessees can claim the credit even after the passing of a long period say about 10 or 20 years after the relevant date. In these situations a reasonable period of six months or one year or under abnormal circumstances a little more can be considered. However, in the instant case the appellants were well aware of the introduction of Modvat scheme to their product and had also filed a declaration to that effect, which was considered and stood adjudicated by the proper officer. In these circumstances filing of declaration in respect of a product, which was not earlier included in the declaration, after a period of four years cannot be accepted inasmuch as for grant of Modvat credit under the transitional provisions, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
