9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (11) TMI 318X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that is deemed to have been paid under Section 3A of the Act. 2. The main issue of the subject case revolves around the following conditions of the said Notification : 4. The provisions of this notification shall apply to only those inputs which have been received directly by the manufacturer of the final products from the factory of the manufacturer of the said inputs under the cover of an invoice declaring that the appropriate duty of excise has been paid on such inputs under the provisions of Section 3A of the said Act. 3. The learned Advocate informs me that the deemed Modvat credit has not been allowed in respect of the following situations : (i) Where the invoice states that duty has to be discharged under Rule 96-ZP( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on such inputs under the provisions of Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944. 5. The learned JDR reads out the condition incorporated in Notification No. 58/97-C.E. which clearly stated that : (i) Manufacturer has to receive directly from the factory of the manufacturer of inputs under the cover of an invoice; and (ii) The invoice should contain a declaration that the appropriate duty of excise has been paid on such inputs under the provisions of Section 3A of the said Act. 6. To support his contention, he relies upon the following case laws : (a) Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Filtex Indus. Ltd. - 2004 (176) E.L.T. 298, in which it was held that, in terms of Notification No. 58/97-C.E. (N.T.), assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of those inputs which have been received directly by the manufacturers from the factory of the manufacturer of the said inputs under the cover of an invoice declaring that the excise has been paid on such inputs. Perhaps this is the reason why the Tribunal in the case of Delhi Steel Industries v. CCE, Chandigarh, supra, had observed that any denial of the deemed credit in terms of Para 4 will be repugnant to the substantive provision of Para 2 of the Notification. In any case apparent differences in approach have surfaced in the Tribunal s decisions, as referred to above. The Registry may, therefore, place the matter before the Hon ble President so as to enable him to constitute a Larger Bench for arriving at a finality. (Dictated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
