9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... April to July, 1998. The appellants availed the Modvat credit in their statutory records against these invoices in Feb., 1999. Show-cause notice was issued to them for denial of Modvat credit under Rule 57G(5) which prohibits the availment of credit beyond the period of six months from the date of issue of duty paying documents. The appellant contested the show-cause notice. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand and imposed penalty. On an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) has also concurred with the views of the adjudicating authority. Hence the present appeal. 3. Ld. Consultant for the appellants submits that he is not denying the fact that the credit of duty paid on inputs were availed by the appellants in Feb., 1999. But it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . From the provisions of Rule 57G(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, it is very clear that the credit shall not be allowed on any documents as specified in sub-rule (3) after six months of the date of issue of such documents. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 57G of Central Excise Rules, 1944, specifies the documents on which Modvat credit can be availed by the appellants. The said Rule is reproduced below : (3) No credit under sub-rule (2), shall be taken by the manufacturer unless the inputs are received in the factory under the cover of any of the following documents, namely :- (a) an invoice issued by a manufacturer of inputs under Rule 52A or 100E of the said Rules; (b) an invoice issued by the manufacturer of inputs from his d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer in the Customs area under Rule 57E ; and (m) an invoice issued by a manufacturer of final products under sub-rule (3) of Rule 57F or sub-rule (1) of Rule 57-S. From the above Rule, it is very clear that the documents as mentioned in the said sub-rule are only eligible documents for availment of credit of duty. It was the arguments of the appellants that once they have availed the credit in RG 23A Part I, it means that they are eligible for availment Modvat credit inspite of Rule 57G(5). This contention of the appellant is mis-placed for the fact that Rule 57G(2) during the relevant period is talking about the availment of credit of duty on inputs. The said Rule during the relevant period reads as under : (2) A manufacturer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finding of the Tribunal is correct. Rule 173Q contains six clauses the contents of which are not same. It was, therefore, necessary for the assessee to be put on notice as to the exact nature of contravention for which the assessee was liable under the provisions of the 173Q. This not having been done the Tribunal s finding cannot be faulted. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. The appellants appeal is squarely covered by the ratio of the Hon ble Supreme Court in respect of penalty imposed on them. Hence the penalty imposed on the appellants is set aside. 7. In view of the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, the appellants appeal is partly allowed as indicated in the above paragraph. (Dictated and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
