TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s after waiving deposit. 2. The appellant manufactures sugar in its factory at Terna Nagar. In the financial year 1995-96 to 1997-98 it acquired various items of capital goods and in accordance with the provisions of Rules 57Q and T took as Modvat credit the duty paid on these items. Sub-rule (5) of Rule 57R prohibits taking credit of the duty paid on capital goods by a manufacturer also claims ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t contended that, although the manufacturer claimed depreciation in the income-tax return that it initially filed included in the value of the capital assets the amount of duty claimed as credit. It filed revised return for each of these three financial years, or "previous years" as they are known in Income Tax Law, in which it excluded the duty taken as credit while calculating the value of this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the assessment. 5. The Commissioner has not dealt with the last point. The Counsel for the appellant agrees that the second point was not raised before him. The first point the Commissioner dismissed it by saying "there is no provision regarding filing of revised return which would legally allow the assessee to rectify their mistake". 6. We do not find it possible for us to say that Modvat c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd allowed under the Central Excise Rules". This provision appears to us to be a mirror image of sub-rule (5) of Rule 57R on the implication that claim for credit should not only have been made but should have been allowed. The position that claim for depreciation should have been permitted, appears to us to implicit in Rule 5 of Rule 57R. We would otherwise be left in a situation where a manufact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted consideration. We are of the view that he should at least do so. While doing so he may also consider the claim that the accounting practice followed by it, effectively washes out claim for depreciation under the Income Tax Act. The counsel for the appellant says that he will make submissions in these aspects supported by necessary evidence within two months from the receipt of this order. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
