9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 547X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ]. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of goods falling under Chapters 72, 73, 74, 84, 85, etc. and were availing the benefit of Modvat credit. In respect of certain inputs they took credit of duty paid by the inputs manufacturer. However, subsequently the value of the inputs, as a result of negotiations by the appellants, was reduced. Accordingly, the appellants issued debit note to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch appeared in the invoice; that they were negotiating the rate contract prices which had resulted in the reduction of the assessable value/transaction value of the inputs/raw materials received; that when the matter regarding finalization of rate of the inputs had been completed, they had claimed from the suppliers, only the amount representing the deference in basic price (without duty) of the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t filed any refund claim; that there is no provision in the Cenvat Credit Rules to reduce the duty credit if there was any reduction in the selling price of the inputs after they had been received; that the rules only provide that the credit is allowed in respect of duty actually paid on the inputs that have been received by the assessee in his factory premises for use in or in relation to manufac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is no dispute about the fact that the debit notes were raised only in respect of the value of the inputs and not in respect of the duty paid by the manufacturer. The effect of reduction of value of inputs may be that the duty required to be paid on the inputs was less than what has actually been paid by the inputs manufacturer. However, the facts remains that the inputs manufacturer has paid the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
