9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hapter 52 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, and they were also availing the MODVAT credit on inputs/capital goods provided under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules 1944. While working as DTA unit they were disallowed the MODVAT credit amounting to Rs.10,79,568/- by Additional Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner's vide three different order-in-originals. The appellant filed the appeal against the said order-in-originals before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), who vide three order-in-appeals dt. 17.10.2000, 16.11.2000 and 27.7.2001 allowed the appeal of the appellants. In between on 27.6.2000 appellants converted their unit into a 100% EOU after taking due approvals from the competent authority. After their appeals were a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pending decision in the appeals. Hence relying on the Board's Circular No. 77/99 rejecting their claim by Commissioner (Appeals) is totally unjust and unwarranted. He also relied in the decision of Tribunal in the case of Sun Pharmaceuticals Indus. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex., Pondicherry reported in 2010 (251) E.L.T. 312 (Tri.-Chennai) in support of his claim. He therefore requested the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) be set aside. 3. The Additional Commissioner (A.R.) appearing for the Revenue submitted copy of the Circular No. 77/99-Cus. dt. 18.11.1999 and also the Circular No. 799/32/2004 dt. 23.9.2004 and submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected their appeal. Since after the conversi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the MODVAT credit is not permissible to the appellant. 5. The case cited by the appellants in case of GMI Super Sales Agencies was clearly distinguished by the Commissioner (Appeals) holding that in the cited case the issue involved was discontinuation of maintaining RG23A whereas the present appeal, the MODVAT Scheme is inapplicable to the appellant. Similarly, the appellant do not get any support from the case of Sun Pharmaceuticals Indus. Ltd.(supra) as in this case the period involved was after the rescinding of Central Excise Rules 1944 under which Rule 100H made the provisions of MODVAT Rules inapplicable to the 100% EOU. In the appellant's case the Rule 100H were very much in force during the relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
