9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'Tribunal'). 2. The controversy lies within a very narrow compass. 3. Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of paper and paper board falling in Chapter 48 of the Tariff. Notification No. 6/2000-CE dated 1-3-2000 was issued whereby the product manufactured by the appellant was exempted from payment of duty during the month of March, 2000. Appellant availed credit as well as cleared goods under the said exemption notification. Thereafter, it suomotu reversed the credit of Rs. 1, 92,365/- to avail the exemption. It deposited the duty on 30-8-2000 for the month of March, 2000 and also applied for refund of the Modvat credit of Rs. 1, 92,365/- which was already reversed by it. The claim of refund was allowed by order dated 13-12-2001 passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exemption notification. The contention of the Revenue was that thereafter the appellant reversed the credit and subsequently paid the duty for the month of March 2000 and filed the refund claim in respect of the credit reversed by it and the refund was allowed. As the appellant availed the benefit of credit in respect of the inputs for the month of March 2000, therefore, it is not entitled for benefit of Notification. 6. The Tribunal held that the decision relied upon by the appellant was not applicable and in any event it having claimed refund and credit which was allowed it cannot again ask for exemption from payment of duty and the claim for refund of duty was rightly rejected. 7. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue) No. 8/99-Central Excise, dated the 28th February, 1999 published in the Gazette vide number G.S.R. 170(E) dated the 28th February, 1999, 9/99-Central Excise, dated the 28th February, 1999 published in the Gazette vide Number G.S.R. 171(E), dated the 28th February, 1999, published in the Gazette vide 8/2000-Central Excise, dated the 1st March, 2000 and 9/2000-Central Excise, dated the 1st March, 2000". 8. It is again pointed out that in certain other cases, for example, condition No. 27 the entry reads as follows: "27. If no credit of duty paid, has been taken under Rule 57A or Rule 57B or Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944." 9. Therefore, even if no credit of duty paid had been taken under Rule 57A, 57B or 57Q of the Rul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctor of Central Excise, Pune [2004 (174) E.L.T. 417 (S.C.)]. It was, inter alia, held as follows: "9. Modvat is basically a duty-collecting procedure. which aims at allowing relief to a manufacturer on the duty element borne by him in respect of the inputs used by him. It was introduced w.e.f. 1-3-1986. The said scheme was regulated under rules 57A to 571 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 Rule 57A entitled a manufacturer to take instant credit of the central excise duty paid on the inputs used by him in the manufacture of the finished product, provided that the input and the finished product were excisable commodities and fell under any of the specified chapters in the tariff schedule. Under rule 57G, every manufacturer was required to file a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stood at the relevant time). Under para (a) (i) of the notification, concession was not admissible where Modvat credit was not availed/admissible 14. In the present case, as found by the Adjudicating Authority and the Tribunal, Modvat credit was not availed/admissible In respect of cast iron and castings, Modvat credit was inadmissible as both these inputs were ex empted, whereas in case of steel bars, the manufacturer did not avail of Modvat credit Therefore, the appellants were not entitled to clear the final products at concessional rate of duty. Lastly, without reversing the credit, the appellants cleared the final products at the concessional rate of duty, in breach of the above notification, in favour of their sister concern and co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccepted. It would mean that primacy has to be given to the Notification over the statutory provisions contained in Rule 57C. Rule 57C reads as follows: "57C. Credit of duty not to be allowed if final products are exempt. - No credit of the specified duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of a final product (other than those cleared either to a unit in a Free Trade Zone or to a hundred percent Export-Oriented Unit) shall be allowed if the final product is exempt from the whole of the duty of excise leviable thereon or is chargeable to nil rate of duty." 14. It provides in mandatory and categorical terms that no credit of the specified duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of a final product (of the enumerated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
