Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (9) TMI 155

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lants manufacture Cellular Sheets falling under heading 39.21, Helmet inserts falling under heading 65.01, Styrene Monomer falling under heading 29.02, Polystyrene Beads falling under heading 39.03, Polystyrene Expandable in Powder form and Reclaimed Plastic containers, both falling under heading 39.03 in addition to Cellular articles for the Conveyance or Packing of the articles of plastics; that the appellants availed of Modvat credit of the duty paid on inputs in respect of all the products other than the impugned goods namely Cellular articles for the Conveyance or Packing; that they claimed exemption in respect of articles for conveyance or packing of goods under Notification No. 5/98-C.E. (Srl. No. 69); that the Commissioner, Central .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plies to Srl. No. 66 of the Notification provides that concessional rate of duty will be applicable to Strips of plastic intended for weaving of fabric or for manufacture of bags if no credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of these goods has been availed of; that the language of conditions of Srl. Nos. 9 10 is totally different; that a plain reading of condition No. 10 does not lead construction suggested by the Department, that the factory of the manufacturer should not be availing any inputs credit for any of the final product manufactured by them; that such construction also goes against the Modvat Rules which under Rule 57C prohibits a manufacturer from taking credit only in a situation where the final product is a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Notification No. 5/98-C.E. only if he does not avail Modvat credit under Rule 57A or 57B on the products mentioned in column (2) or any other product manufactured in the same factory; that as the appellants were availing of Modvat credit on the inputs used in the manufacture of other goods, the exemption under the notification is not available to them in respect of goods falling under Heading 39.23; that extended period of limitation is also invokable as the appellants in their declaration, effective from 3-6-1998 had not mentioned that they were engaged in the manufacture and clearance of goods falling under sub-heading other than Heading 39.23; that it was a deliberate omission to avail exemption under Notification No. 5/98: that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mption under said Srl number is available subject to the conditions specified in Srl. No. 10 of the Annexure to the Notification. A perusal of the condition No. 10 reveals that exemption under Srl. No. 69 of the table is available subject to the condition that the manufacturer does not avail of credit of duty (i) on the products mentioned in column (2) or (ii) other product manufactured in the same factory. It is not in dispute that the appellants had not availed of the credit of duty paid on the products mentioned in column (2) i.e. products falling under Headings 39.23, 39.24 and 39.26. The Revenue has denied the exemption to the appellants on the ground that they were availing of Modvat credit on the inputs under Rule 57A or 57B which we .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... during June, 98 to November, 98 no Modvat credit was availed of duty paid on these granules. 6. The show cause notice was issued on 25-2-1999 for demanding the duty from 3-6-1998 to November, 98 and as such some of the period was beyond normal period of 6 months specified in Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act. We are of the view that extended period of limitation was not invokable in the present matter as in their declaration filed in 1997 they had clearly mentioned that they manufacture goods falling under headings 39.21, and 39.03 and also in their classification list/declaration filed for the earlier periods. It is also not the case of the department that the appellants have not filed classification/declaration or Modvat declara .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates