9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty and were brought into the duty net from 1-3-1997. The appellant filed claim for Modvat credit of the inputs in stock as on 1-3-1997 and also for the inputs received between 1-3-1997 to 16-3-1997. The appellants filed requisite declaration of the inputs under Rule 57G to the authorities on 17-3-1997. Appellant availed the Modvat credit on 28-3-1997. Show cause notice was issued to the appellant for denying the Modvat credit and also for imposition of the penalty having violated the provisions of the Central Excise Rules, in respect of availment of the credit. The appellants contested the show cause notice on the ground that they had availed the Modvat credit based on the provisions of Rule 57H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e 57H were in fact are exception for availment of Modvat credit in respect of those assessees who could not file the declaration as required under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. It is his submission that the appellants had in fact filed a condonation of delay for the filing of declaration belatedly and hence their case is not covered under Rule 57H(1B). He submits that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon ble Tribunal in the case of the Dy. Director, Store Procurement Deptt. v. CCE, Chandigarh as reported at 2000 (123) E.L.T. 1169 (Tribunal). 4. Considered the submissions made by both sides and perused records. I find from the records that the Modvat credit to the appellant has been denied on the inputs ly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon or is chargeable to nil rate of duty. (4) A manufacturer who has filed a declaration under sub-rule [(1B)] or sub-rule (3) may, after obtaining the dated acknowledgement of aforesaid, take credit of the duty paid on the inputs received by him : Provided that no credit shall be taken unless the inputs were received in the factory under the cover of a Gate Pass, an A.R.I., a Bill of Entry or any other document as may be prescribed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs [constituted under the Central Boards of Revenue Act, 1963 (54 of 1963)] in this behalf evidencing the payment of duty on such inputs and such evidence is made available by the assessee to the department. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declarations as required by the Rules allowing the Modvat credit. The purpose apparently appears to be to give the credit to the manufacturers for those raw materials on which they have already paid the duty used as inputs for the manufacture of the goods which are liable to the duty as a final product. Rule 57H has two limbs, one pertains to such inputs as are lying in stock or are received in the factory after filing the declaration made under Rule 57G and the second limb of the Rule pertains to those inputs which are used in the manufacture of final product and which are cleared from the factory on or after 1st March, 1987 provided that no credit has been taken by the manufacturer in respect of such inputs under any other Rule or Notific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacturers claiming the credit, that declaration has to be considered in the light of the record available with the Central Excise Authorities. It is not the case of the Central Excise authorities that the details of the inputs which are already used for manufacturing the goods cleared by the authorities on 1-3-1987 and after are not available with them. They have actually been filed by the petitioners along with the applications as is manifest from the petition and that fact has not been denied or disputed by the authorities. Therefore, on the basis of those details the credit should always be given to the manufacturers after verification of the inputs used for the manufacture of the goods cleared on 1-3-1987 and thereafter. But it see ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dle for availment of the Modvat credit, subsequent to the amendment to the Rule 57G on 7-9-99. The relevant portion of the Division Bench judgment is as under :- 4. The amended rule which came into force from 9-2-1999 was in existence when the declarations of J.B.M. Tools Ltd. and Autoline Stampings Pvt. Ltd. were filed. SKF had filed its declaration earlier to the amendment. The reason that the Assistant Commissioner advances for not accepting the declaration is that sub-rule (13) does not offer any protection in cases where no declaration at all is filed . This is the argument that the departmental representative reiterates. Clause (i) of sub-rule (13) refers to credit under Rule 57G and we are not concerned with that. Clause (ii) has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
