9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zations issued to them within the stipulated time of eighteen months from the date of advance authorization. It is well evident that on the date of challan evidencing the payment of duty against which the appellants claim the CENVAT Credit, is after 1st July 2017, the date when the CENVAT Credit Scheme was rescinded. In absence of any scheme of CENVAT Credit Scheme on the date of payment of duty as above the claim to CENVAT Credit cannot be there. Indirectly by claiming that the they are not in position to claim CENVAT Credit, appellant has sought for the refund of the duties paid by them for nor non fulfillment of the obligation under advance authorization issued to them. Reliance can be placed in the case of DEVENDRA KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF UTTARANCHAL ORS. [ 2013 (7) TMI 1115 - SUPREME COURT ] where it was held that ' A person having done wrong cannot take advantage of his own wrong and plead bar of any law to frustrate the lawful trial by a competent Court. In such a case the legal maxim Nullus Commodum Capere Potest De Injuria Sua Propria applies. The persons violating the law cannot be permitted to urge that their offence cannot be subjected to inquiry, trial or investigati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... advance authorizations during the period April 2018 and May 2018, it was observed that there was a shortfall in the fulfillment of export obligations. Accordingly, the appellants paid the amount of customs duty including CVD (Rs.26,18,984/-) and SAD (Rs. 9,79,363/-) forgone on the quantities of duty free imported raw material proportionate to the shortfall in the fulfillment of export obligation vide several challans during the period April 2018 and May 2018. 2.3 Appellant claims that prior to 01.07.2017, they were entitled to avail Cenvat credit on the CVD and SAD paid for regularization of unutilized duty-free inputs imported against the advance authorization Scheme in terms of Rule 3 read with Rule 9 of the Credit Rules. However, post implementation of the GST (w.e.f. 1.7.2017), there is no specific provision for availing credit of CVD and SAD paid post 1.7.2017. In view of transitional provision i.e., Section 140(1) of CGST Act, 2017, the credit lying in the ER-1 return on 30.6.2017 was allowed to be carried forward in GST. However, there is no specific provision for transfer of credit of CVD and SAD paid subsequent to introduction of GST in respect of goods imported prior to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s entitled to claim credit and consequent refund of the said amount under Section 142(3) of the CGST Act. Cenvat Credit is a vested and indefeasible right of the appellants. Vested right cannot be taken away by introduction of new tax regime as has been held in Adfert Technologies Pvt Ltd 2019 (11) TMI 282 P H High Court]. Department SLP was dismissed by the Apex Court as reported in [2020 (3) TMI 188 SC]. Section 142(3) specifically provides to claim refund of credit paid under existing regime. Therefore, the appellants are entitled for refund in cash under Section 142(3). Reliance is placed on following decisions of CESTAT in support of their claim to refund o New Age Laminators Pvt. Ltd [2022 (3) TMI 748 - CESTAT DELHI] o Flexi Caps Polymers Pvt. Ltd. [2021 (9) TMI 917 CESTAT DELHI] o Mithila Drugs Ltd. [2022(3) TMI 58 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] o ITCO Industries Ltd. [2022 (6) TMI 1040 - CESTAT CHENNAI] o Clariant Chemicals India Ltd. [2022 (10) TMI 796- CESTAT MUMBAI] o Ganges International Pvt. Ltd. [2022 (3) TMI 544- Madras High Court] o GEE Ltd. [2022 (10) TMI 957 CESTAT Mumbai] o OSI Systems Pvt. Ltd. [2022 (9) TMI 801 CESTAT Hyderabad] o Circor Flow Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the provisions of Section 11B(2), sub section(a), (b), (d), (e) and (f). In respect of Section 11B(2) subsection (c), there is no provision under the CENVAT Credit Rules 2004, Central Excise Act, 1944 and Central Excise Rules, 2002 which allows refund of CVD and SAD paid due to non-fulfillment of export obligation observed during the assessment of advance authorization. ii) Customs duties paid by the assesses are by compulsion when they realized that they would not be able to fulfill export obligation proportionately for imports under the said advance authorization only on receipt of demand note from DGFT. Since the liabilities were discharged only after demand was raised by DGFT, therefore fault is not bonafide, as they have not paid such amount suomoto. The cenvat credit for such payment of CVD and SAD is not eligible in terms of Rule 9(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as the assessee did not pay such customs duties suo moto themself but paid only after on the basis final assessment by the Customs. 3. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant filed present appeal mainly on the grounds that: I. As per the provision of section 142(3) of CGST Ar. 2017, refund of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 11B of the Central excise act, 1944. The provision of Rule -5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 is as under: RULE-5- Refund of CENVAT Credit- (1) A manufacturer who clears a final product or an intermediate product for export without payment of duty under bond or letter of undertaking, or a service provider who provides an output service which is exported without payment of service tax, shall be allowed refund of CENVAT credit as determined by the prescribed formula subject to procedure, safeguards, conditions and limitations as may be specified by the Board by notification in the Official Gazette: 6.1 I find that above mentioned Rule -5 provides refund of Cenvat credit, only in those cases where credit has been taken and utilized in respect of final product or an intermediate product or output service which has been cleared for export without payment of duty. Further, explanation to Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 provide that refund includes rebate of duty of Central excise duty on excisable goods exported out of India or on excisable materials used in the manufacture of goods which are exported out of India. There is no other provision under Cenvat Credit Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as held that We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has made an error in holding that the view held by his predecessor was binding on him in the same circumstances an order of the superior format would be binding on the Commissioner (Appeals) but his freedom to critically examine his predecessor's finding cannot be taken away. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) could have extracted his predecessor's findings and could have agreed therewith and then dismissed the appeal before him. In not doing so, he has not applied his mind to the facts before him. This order therefore, cannot be sustained.(para 3) 4.3 Appellants had imported raw materials under various Advance License as against export of pigments imported much prior to the date appointed day under GST Regime i.e. 1st July 2017, when the scheme of taxation under Central Excise Act, 1944, and CENVAT Rules, 2004, and they were entitled to the CENVAT Credit in respect of the CVD and SAD paid. In terms of the advance authorizations available with them these goods were imported without payment of duties of custom. As they could not fulfill the export obligation in proportionate to the imported raw materials under the said Adv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t they are entitled to cash refund of the above amounts paid subsequently under the head of CVD and SAD, as they have paid these duties against the goods imported by them much before the introduction of GST Regime. The scheme of the erstwhile CENVAT Credit has been made in terms of the Section 37 (2) () of the Central Excise Act,1944 which is reproduced below: (xvia) provide for the credit of duty paid or deemed to have been paid on the goods used in, or in relation to the manufacture of excisable goods. From the above provision, it is well evident that the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 were only permitting the credit of the duty paid or deemed to be paid. Rule 4 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 provided as follows: 4. Conditions for allowing CENVAT credit.- (1 ) The CENVAT credit in respect of inputs may be taken immediately on receipt of the inputs in the factory of the manufacturer or in the premises of the provider of output service: 4.6 From plain reading of the above it is quite evident CENVAT Credit Scheme was in normal course allowing the CENVAT Credit of the duty paid on the goods at the time of receipt of the goods by the manufacturer or the service provider. Appellant claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foundation being removed, the superstructure falls. A person having done wrong cannot take advantage of his own wrong and plead bar of any law to frustrate the lawful trial by a competent Court. In such a case the legal maxim Nullus Commodum Capere Potest De Injuria Sua Propria applies. The persons violating the law cannot be permitted to urge that their offence cannot be subjected to inquiry, trial or investigation. (Vide: Union of India v. Maj. Gen. Madan Lal Yadav, AIR 1996 SC 1340; and Lily Thomas v. Union of India Ors., AIR 2000 SC 1650). Nor can a person claim any right arising out of his own wrong doing. (Juri Ex Injuria Non Oritur). b. Mahender Singh [2022 SCC OnLine SC 909] 15. A three Judge Bench of this Court in a judgment reported as Chandra Kishore Jha v. Mahavir Prasad Ors. [(1999) 8 SCC 266], held as under: 17....................It is a well-settled salutary principle that if a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner and in no other manner. (See with advantage: Nazir Ahmad v. King Emperor [(1935- 36) 63 IA 372 : AIR 1936 PC 253 (II)] , Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of V.P. [AIR 1954 SC 322 : 1954 SCR 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... registered person shall not be allowed to take credit in the following circumstances, namely: (i) where the said amount of credit is not admissible as input tax credit under this Act; or (ii) where he has not furnished all the returns required under the existing law for the period of six months immediately preceding the appointed date; or (iii) where the said amount of credit relates to goods manufactured and cleared under such exemption notifications as are notified by the Government. 140 (5) A registered person shall be entitled to take, in his electronic credit ledger, credit of eligible duties and taxes in respect of inputs or input services received on or after the appointed day but the duty or tax in respect of which has been paid by the supplier under the existing law, within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed, subject to the condition that the invoice or any other duty or tax paying document of the same was recorded in the books of account of such person within a period of thirty days from the appointed day: PROVIDED that the period of thirty days may, on sufficient cause being shown, be extended by the Commissioner for a further period not exceeding thirty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liability acquired, accrued or incurred under the amended Act or repealed Acts or orders under such repealed or amended Acts: PROVIDED that any tax exemption granted as an incentive against investment through a notification shall not continue as privilege if the said notification is rescinded on or after the appointed day; or iv. affect any duty, tax, surcharge, fine, penalty, interest as are due or may become due or any forfeiture or punishment incurred or inflicted in respect of any offence or violation committed against the provisions of the amended Act or repealed Acts; or v. affect any investigation, inquiry, verification (including scrutiny and audit), assessment proceedings, adjudication and any other legal proceedings or recovery of arrears or remedy in respect of any such duty, tax, surcharge, penalty, fine, interest, right, privilege, obligation, liability, forfeiture or punishment, as aforesaid, and any such investigation, inquiry, verification (including scrutiny and audit), assessment proceedings, adjudication and other legal proceedings or recovery of arrears or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such tax, surcharge, penalty, fine, interest, forf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash has been conferred notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the provisions of existing law other than the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 42. It is not in dispute that the refunds under the existing law of Service Tax as well as Central Excise Act, 1944 are governed by section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and subsection 2 of section 11 B also refers to application for refund made under section 11 B(1) of Central Excise Act, 1944. Further section 11B(3) of Central Excise Act, 1944 clearly provides that all kinds of refunds including those arising out of judgement , decree or orders of court or tribunal are to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of section 11B (2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 . It is also important to note that section 11B(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 deals with the manner in which applications for refund under section 11B (1) are to be dealt with as it uses the word such application which is clearly referrable to section 11B (1) of 28 Central Excise Act, 1944. Further, the proviso to section 11B(2) deals with situations of rebate of duty; unspent advance deposits; principles of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ief by refund in cash if the person is found entitled under the existing law in terms of the existing law. Section 142(3) does not create any new right on any person but it saves the existing right which existed on the appointed day and provides the modalities for refund in cash if found entitled under the existing law as the entire claim is mandated to be dealt with as per the existing law. It neither revive any right which stood extinguished in terms of the existing law nor does it create a new right by virtue of coming into force of CGST, Act. 46. Section 174 of the CGST Act read with section 6 of the General Clauses Act saves the right acquired, accrued or vested under the existing law and does not create any new right which never existed on the appointed day i.e on 01.07.2017 under the existing law. 47. The argument of the petitioner by referring to second proviso to section 142(3) of CGST Act that it indicates that section 142(3) would apply to the situations where the assessee has failed to take transitional credit under section 140(1), is also devoid of any merits. The second proviso only indicates that if the assessee has taken transitional credit he will not be entitled t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Annexure-5) extending the date of filing TRAN-1 to 31.10.2017, the same was in relation to certain service tax issues which were paid after 30.06.2017 under reverse charge basis to cover instances of bills raised on 30.06.2017 since credit is available only if the payment is made and the payment in such cases could be made only after 30.06.2017. However, in the instant case the bill was admittedly generated on 23.05.2017, services availed and bill amount including service tax was paid in April 2017 but the original bill did not reach the petitioner for unknown/undisclosed reasons. 51. It is apparent from the impugned orders that the specific case of the respondent is that the petitioner had claimed CENVAT Credit under ST-3 return thereby treating the services involved in the present case as their input services used for providing output service, whereas they are not output service provider and the same cannot be used for providing output services. Therefore, it cannot be their input services under Rule 2 (l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. I am also of the considered view that the petitioner could not have claimed the impugned service tax on port services in ST-3 return as they were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice provider (port authority) or the service recipient (the petitioner) who have failed to comply the provision of law, both under the existing law and also under the CGST Act. The relied upon provisions of CGST Act do not cover any such situation relating to any consequences due to inter parte acts and omissions. In the instant case, as per the case of the petitioner, the entire problem has cropped up due to non-receipt of the invoice in original from the port authorities although the port services were availed and payments for the same to the port authorities were made by the petitioner in the month of April 2017, the invoice was generated by the port authorities in the month of May 2017 but the original invoice was received by the petitioner only on 20.09.2017 i.e after coming into force of CGST Act. The late receipt of the invoice is essentially between the petitioner and the port authorities and the tax collecting authorities had nothing to do in the matter. Certainly, the delay in receipt of 32 original invoice is not attributable to the respondent authorities under the existing law or under the new law. 54. The authorities have held in the impugned orders that in the instanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant and was appropriated against the amounts already deposited by them. In appeal the tribunal has vide the order dated 11.10.2022 remanded the matter back to re-determine the amount of credit to be denied. In the said case entire amounts were paid during the period when the Central Excise Act, 1944 and CENVAT Credit Rules, 1944 were in force. It is not even the case like the case of present appellant where in the entire amount sought as refund has been paid after the appointed day for shift from the Central Excise Regime to CGST Regime. Hence this decision do not support the case of appellant. 4.10 The decision of the Hon ble Madras High Court [2022 (8) TMI 1143 Madras High Court] relied upon by the appellant also do not support the claim to refund made in the present case. Following is observed in the said decision: 6. It is an admitted fact that the assessee is eligible to claim cenvat credit under the erstwhile Central Excise Act, prior to 30.06.2017, but they were unable to claim, due to transitional provision has come into effect from 01.07.2017. It is also not in dispute that they had paid the service tax for the period from April 2017 to June 2017 belatedly i.e., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by providing all necessary inputs to the satisfaction of the authorities to take a decision thereon. 7.It is evident from the aforesaid order that the learned Judge, considering the peculiar circumstances of the case, viz., the assessee is entitled to avail cenvat credit of the service tax already paid, which fact was also admitted by the Revenue, but they were unable to claim, due to transitional provision has come into effect from 01.07.2017, ordered the writ petition by setting aside the rejection order of the appellant and remanding back the matter to the appellant for fresh consideration, with certain directions, which are aggrieved by the appellant / Revenue. 8.This court is of the view that what was impugned herein is only the order of remand passed by the learned Judge and hence, there is no requirement to set aside the same in entirety. However, this court is inclined to modify the order of the learned Judge to some extent. Accordingly, the same is modified by directing the appellant to consider the application of the assessee under section 142(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, based on the available materials and dispose the same, on merits and after affording an opportunity of h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expressed. It is not permissible to import provisions in a taxing statute so as to supply any assumed deficiency. In support of the same we may refer to the decision of this Court in CST v. Modi Sugar Mills Ltd. wherein this Court at AIR para 11 has observed as follows : 11. ..In interpreting a taxing statute, equitable considerations are entirely out of place. Nor can taxing statutes be interpreted on any presumptions or assumptions. The court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed: it cannot imply anything which is not expressed; it cannot import provisions in the statutes so as to supply any assumed deficiency. 21. Therefore, the attempt of the High Court to read down the provision by way of substituting the word or by an and so as to give relief to the assessee is found to be erroneous. In that regard the submission of the counsel for the appellant is well founded that once the said credit is taken the beneficiary is at liberty to utilise the same, immediately thereafter, subject to the Credit Rules. 22. In the case at hand, we are considering a claim of refund of duty. Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed if the manufacturer or provider of output service avails of drawback allowed under the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995, or claims a rebate of duty under the Central Excise Rules, 2002, in respect of such duty : Provided further that no credit of the additional duty leviable under sub-section (5) of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, as amended by clause 72 of the Finance Bill, 2005, the clause which has, by virtue of the declaration made in the said Finance Bill, under the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1931, the force of law, shall be utilised for payment of service tax on any output service. Explanation : For the purposes of this rule, the words output service which are exported means any output service in respect of which payment is received in India in convertible foreign exchange and the same is not repatriated from, or sent outside, India. Provided that the CENVAT credit or inputs shall not be denied to job worker referred to in rule 12AA of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, on the ground that the said inputs are used in the manufacture of goods cleared without payment of duty under the provisions of that rule. 23. Thus, a perusal of this ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the order-in-original, but came to be accepted by the appellate authority. The Revenue approached the CESTAT against the appellate authority s view, but the CESTAT dismissed the Revenue s appeal. Now, if the cash refund was not permissible, then, it is evident that by reading into the provision something which is expressly not there, such a refund was sought. 25. In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. Gujarat Narmada Fertilizers Company Limited, - (2009) 9 SSC 101 = 2009 (240) E.L.T. 661 (S.C.), the Hon ble Supreme Court construed the provisions and held as under :- 15. As can be seen from the submissions, the contention of the assessee is that exclusion of fuel inputs from the purview of sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 would mean that such inputs are also automatically excluded from sub-rule (1) whereas according to the Department sub-rule (1) is a general rule which provides, that except for the circumstances mentioned in sub-rule (2), CENVAT credit shall not be allowed on such quantity of inputs used in the manufacture of exempted goods and even though fuel inputs are excluded from sub-rule (2), such inputs would still fall under sub-rule (1). 16. In our view, sub-rule (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods required in such process would fall within the expression in the manufacture of goods . 30. In Union Carbide India Ltd. v. CCE [1996 (86) E.L.T. 613 (Tri.)] a larger Bench of CEGAT observed that a wide impact of the expression used in relation to manufacture must be allowed its natural play. Inputs (raw materials) used in the entire process of conversion into finished products or any other process (like electricity generation) which is integrally connected with the ultimate production of final product has to fall within the above expression. It was observed that the purpose was to widen the scope, ambit and content of inputs . According to the Special Bench of CEGAT, the purpose behind the above expression is to widen the ambit of the definition so as to attract all goods, which do not enter directly or indirectly into the finished product, but are used in any activity concerned with or pertaining to the manufacture of the finished product. 34. In the past, there was a controversy as to what is the meaning of the word input , conceptually. It was argued by the Department in a number of cases that if the identity of the input is not contained in the final product then such an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and who has been taking CENVAT credit on inputs or input services before such option is exercised, shall be required to pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit, if any, allowed to him in respect of inputs lying in stock or in process or contained in final products lying in stock on the date when such option is exercised and after deducting the said amount from the balance, if any, lying in his credit, the balance, if any, still remaining shall lapse and shall not be allowed to be utilized for payment of duty on any excisable goods, whether cleared for home consumption or for export. (3) A manufacturer or producer of a final product shall be required to pay an amount equivalent to the CENVAT credit, if any, taken by him in respect of inputs received for use in the manufacture of the said final product and is lying in stock or in process or is contained in the final product lying in stock, if, - (i) he opts for exemption from whole of the duty of excise leviable on the said final product manufactured or produced by him under a notification issued under section 5A of the Act; or (ii) the said final product has been exempted absolutely, under section 5A of the Act, and after dedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titled as Conditions for Allowing Cenvat credit , then, we must understand the scheme in such manner as would make the law workable and consistent. Refund of Cenvat credit in terms of Rule 5 is permissible only when there is a clearance of a final product of a manufacturer or of an intermediate product for export without payment of duty under a bond or letter of undertaking of a service provider, who provides an output service which is exported without payment of tax and by applying the format which is carved out with effect from 1st April, 2012 by the substituted Rule 5. 30. Prior to such substitution, we have not seen anything in Rule 5 permitting refund of unutilised credit. We are not dealing with a situation or case of a manufacturer or producer of final products seeks to claim Cenvat credit of the duty paid on inputs lying in stock or in process when the manufactured or produced goods cease to be exempted goods or any goods become excisable (see Rule 3(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004). Thus, refund of Cenvat credit is permissible where any input is used for the final product which is cleared for export under bond or letter of undertaking, as the case may be, or used in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... coming out of the Modvat Scheme. In these circumstances, we answer all the three questions as framed in para 17 against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. 32. Thus, the High Court of Karnataka took the view that there is no express prohibition in terms of Rule 5 and that rule refers to a manufacturer. Thus, even if there is no manufacture in the light of the closure of the factory, the assessee being a manufacturer is construed as one coming out of the Modvat scheme but still eligible for cash refund. The factory is closed and the inputs were not used in the manufacture of a final product is, thus, overlooked. So long as the assessee is a manufacturer even if his factory is closed, the input credit was available, is thus the view. Hence, the refund was held to be permissible. 33. When the matter was carried to the Hon ble Supreme Court by the Revenue, the Hon ble Supreme Court noted the concession of the Learned Additional Solicitor General. That concession is that the views of the Tribunals to the aforesaid effect have not been appealed against by the Revenue/Union of India. Pertinently, there is no concession by the Additional Solicitor General of India on the point of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... having a binding effect, that the principle of judicial discipline was pressed into service. 36. After the view taken in Steel Strips Ltd. (supra) and which was also fairly brought to our notice, it is evident that this principle has no application to the facts and circumstances before us. 37. Finally, we do not find any merit in the arguments of Mr. Patil to the effect that if the earlier judgment is not appealed against, an appeal against the subsequent order or judgment passed relying upon the earlier judgment cannot be sustained. He pressed into service the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Birla Corporation Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise - 2005 (186) E.L.T. 266 (S.C.). There, the issue was entirely different. The issue was whether the duty paid on spares of ropeway used for the purpose of transporting the crushed limestone from the mines located 4.2 kilometer away to the factory is entitled to Modvat credit. That was disallowed on the ground that ropeway transports raw material from the mines to the factory premises and is not a material handling equipment within the factory premises. It was not disputed that the crushed limestone is brought from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
