9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 641X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not Rule 57F. - held that:- Considering the law, as revealed from Section 131 of the Finance Act which introduced the amendment protecting the rights accrued and the liabilities incurred under the statutory ruling prevailing at the time of insertion of the amendment, obviously would disclose that, the legal provisions prevailing on the date of removal of the goods will have to be understood with reference to the dates on which the goods had been cleared and with reference to the provisions which were in force on such dates. Having so understood, the calculation made in that regard by the Commissioner in the impugned order, prima facie, does not appear to suffer from any infirmity. In that regard, no, prima facie, case has been made out for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 504/03. It is further case of the applicants that, as regards the differential duty on the removal of the inputs after 1997 ought to have been at the rate prevalent at the time of removal of the said inputs and as regards duty on the goods lying in stock, the applicants could not have been denied the modvat benefit in respect thereof and no duty liability could arise till the factory is closed and there is already pronouncement by the Tribunal that the factory is still in existence, though actual production is not being made therein. 5. Perusal of the order dated 28-2-2007 passed by the Tribunal discloses a finding to the effect that the factory in question is in legal existence despite the fact that it may not be manufacturing and clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch in the case of Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. v. CCE, Kanpur, 2001 (131) E.L.T. 370 (T-LB). It is further sought to be contended on behalf of the respondents that, the rights accrued and liabilities incurred under the provisions when the inputs were procured will continue even after the amendment to those Rules in view of Section 131 of the Finance Act under which the amendments were introduced. 7. As regards second point, sought to be canvassed, which relates to the duty liability in relation to the goods still lying in the stock, the representative for the applicants has submitted that, the Tribunal under its order dated 20-2-2007 has already held that the duty liability would be as on the date of the removal and, therefore, the prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich has already been removed, is concerned, as rightly pointed out on behalf of the respondent, the Larger Bench of the Tribunal has already held that, the insertion of amendment would not affect the previous operation of the rules and the rights and privileges accrued as well as the liabilities incurred under the Rules which were earlier in force would be saved. The Tribunal under Order, dated 20-2-2007 has, undoubtedly, said that, the recalculation of duty demand has to be in accordance with the legal provisions prevailing on the day the impugned goods and capital goods have been cleared. The expression in accordance with the legal provisions prevailing on the day the impugned goods and capital goods have been cleared has to be understo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
