9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (5) TMI 122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pose, duty was demanded on the indigenously acquired capital goods as per demand notice dated 5-6-1995 of the Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise, Nellore division and accordingly an amount of Rs. 16,33,355/- was paid under T.R.6 Challan No. 1/95-96, dated 6-6-1995. M/s. Krebs Biochemicals Ltd., sought for permission from the ACCE to avail Modvat credit for the above said amount and their claim was rejected as per Order-in-Original No. 44/95, dated 20-11-1995. 3.Aggrieved by this order, they filed an appeal to Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad who also rejected their appeal vide Order-in-Appeal No. 93/96(G)(CE), dated 27-11-1996 on the following grounds :- (a) 57Q(2) did not allow the credit to goods received prior to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision under Central Excise Rules for such allowance is patently incorrect inasmuch as the goods have been debonded and duty has been paid on them vide Challan No. 1/95-96, dated 6-6-1995 i.e. to say that after 16-3-1995, when this scheme by allowing Modvat credit on Capital goods was expanded. They further submitted that since the machinery in the 100% EOU was removed on payment of duty on 6-6-1995 to the domestic tariff area unit and used by the appellants on being registered under Rule 174 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 on 7-6-1995, appellant is eligible for availing the credit inasmuch as machinery were deemed to have been removed from 100% EOU undertaking and received in domestic tariff area unit only in June, 1995. They have submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. Counsel has, therefore, submitted that their claiming Modvat credit for the amounts which they have paid as Central Excise duty on the Capital goods be held to be correct, and their appeal may be allowed with consequential relief. 7.Ld. DR, Shri S. Kannan submits that no invoice has been issued in this case, and therefore as correctly held by the Commissioner (Appeals) and by the AC, since T.R.6 challan is not a specified document, Modvat cannot be allowed on this document. Shri Kannan also submitted that duty has been paid on the depreciated amount on the date of debonding with regard to goods which were received from 1993 onwards and during this time, no Modvat credit scheme was there on Capital goods which came only with effect fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
