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

2005 (3) TMI 152

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ys as under : (A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit the present petition; (B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, direction or declaration declaring that Rule 57G(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 are ultra vires the Constitution of India; (C) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 26-11-1998 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Bhavnagar, respondent No. 3 (Annexure "E"), the order dated 27-12-2000 passed by the Com .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ount and inventory for manufacture and sale of Ethyl Alcohol (not-denatured) meant only for export sale and shall not avail of Modvat credit benefit on molasses, which is used as inputs in the manufacturing process. It appears that on 31st March, 1997, 3,10,498 litres of finished products meant for export were in stock. According to the petitioner out of the aforesaid goods it was constrained to sell 1,10,498 litres in the local market as special denatured spirit and the petitioner paid excise duty amounting to Rs. 2,59,641/-. On 14th June, 1997 the petitioner wrote to the Range Superintendent intimating that it would like to avail of Modvat credit on 482 MTs of molasses, worked out on pro rata basis having been consumed in manufacture of 1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ultra vires the Constitution of India). It was submitted by Mr. Nayak that time limit of six months imposed by sub-rule (5) of Rule 57G of the Rules is arbitrary and has no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved by Rule 57G of the Rules. That the said sub-rule stipulates that a manufacturer is not entitled to take credit after six months of the date of issue of any document specified in sub-rule (3), but according to Mr. Nayak this limitation of period of six months cannot be applied in all cases and in all circumstances. Elaborating on the submission he contended that in a given case the manufacturer may be placed in a situation whereunder due to circumstances beyond the control of the manufacturer he cannot avail of the cred .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... This conduct of the petitioner indicates that the challenge is an afterthought. Be that as it may. Having heard the learned Counsel the petition is rejected on merits for the following reasons. 7.It is an accepted position that prior to insertion of Rule 57G, with special reference to sub-rule (5) powers to condone delay were available with the Assistant Commissioner by recording reasons. This very fact would indicate that legislature has taken a conscious decision while framing the present rule that such power which was available with the authority shall not now be available. In the circumstances, it is not possible to state that sub-rule (5) which prescribes the time limit is absolute in terms and is bad in law because there is no power .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... credit on duty paid inputs after six months of the date of issue of any document specified in sub-rule (3). Under sub-rule (3) various documents under cover of which the inputs are received in the factory are mentioned. The legislative intent is very clear i.e. to verify that the inputs received, which are supposed to be duty paid, are covered by a particular document. In other words within that period of six months the revenue authorities can backtrack and cross check the supplier and the factum of the input having actually borne duty. 9.In the result, on an overall reading of the scheme which is postulated by Rule 57G of the Rules it is not possible to accept the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner. There is nothing arbitrary .....

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