9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or vehicle parts; that Maruti Udyog Ltd. imported under Bill of Entry No. 103052, dated 24-3-2000 certain dyes and moulds and made necessary declaration on the Bill of Entry and got it endorsed by the Customs authorities stating therein that Maruti Udyog Ltd. would not be availing Cenvat Credit of the Countervailing duty which would be availed of by the Appellants; that the said endorsement was countersigned by the Customs authorities in terms of Board's Circular No. 179/13/95-CX.-8, dated 29-2-96; that the Commissioner under the impugned Order has denied them the Cenvat Credit and imposed penalty holding that the endorsed Bill of Entry is not prescribed document for availing the credit. Learned Advocate relied upon the decision of the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he unit for availing credit and endorsed by the proper officer of the Customs. He also mentioned that the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Balmer Lawrie Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Kanpur, 2000 (116) E.L.T. 364 (T) = 2000 (36) RLT 666 is not applicable to the facts of the present matter as the said decision pertains to the interpretation of Notification No. 15/94, dated 30-3-94; that further in the present matter the Cenvat Credit has been availed of on the basis of Board's subsequent Circular referred to above. 3. Countering the arguments Shri D.N. Chaudhary, learned D.R., submitted that the Bill of Entry in question is not an endorsed Bill of Entry inasmuch as no endorsement has been made on the reverse side of the Bil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lar dated 29-2-96 is not available to them. Finally he relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Balmer Lawrie (supra). In reply the learned Advocate submitted that the letter given by Maruti Udyog Ltd. to Customs is pasted on the reverse side of the Bill of Entry on which the Customs endorses the transfer of the goods under their signature, and therefore, the Bill of Entry is an endorsed Bill of Entry; that it has been held by the Tribunal in the case of CCE v. Achutha Vulcanising Cement P. Ltd., 2001 (132) E.L.T. 509 (T) = 2001 (46) RLT 337 that the invoice issued by a dealer to job worker is a valid document for taking Credit though there is no sale of input; that similar views were expressed by the Tribunal in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the name of registered office but credit to be availed by the factory, the Circular, in fact deals with the following three situations:- (i) the Bill of Entry has been filed in the name of the registered office/head office of the manufacturer for the inputs to be used in his factory. (ii) Imported goods lying in Customs dock area/bonded warehouse are diverted to manufacturing units in whose name Bill of Entry has not been filed. (iii) domestic duty paid goods consigned to a manufacturing unit are diverted in whole or part from a duty paid godown of the manufacturer or such diversion is affected in transit. The perusal of the Circular reveals that Para 3 of the Circular deals with the situation (i) whereas Para 4 deals w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
