TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 216X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the Tribunal vide Final Order No. A/48/2001/NB, dated 15-12-2000, had allowed the Modvat credit in respect of Bill of Entry No. 108476. He submitted that the date of issue of document in case of imported goods should be the date when the goods were given out of charge Order and received in the factory and not the date of Bill of Entry; that it has been held by the Tribunal in Bullows Paint Equipment Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Mumbai VI, [2001 (138) E.L.T. 1098 (T)] that 'The Phrase "issued" does not qualify the named document viz. Bs/E. There is a good reason for this. A manufacturer would issue an invoice along with physical movement of the goods .... The date of filing of the B/E has no relevance to the physical movement of the goods covered thereunder. The Bill of Entry after filing would be assessed. Then, if necessary, on examination of the goods, the duty would be paid and goods would be physically cleared. Where the Customs have certain queries or where the importers have some difficulties in establishing the claim as to the importability of the goods, there would be a period of several weeks before the goods are physically cleared. It may happen that the goods are seized by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acturer after six months of the date of issue of any document specified in sub-rule (3)"; that sub-rule (3) of Rule specifically mentions Bill of Entry as one of the document for availing the Credit and as such it cannot be claimed that the said provisions of six months, restriction is not applicable in the case of the goods imported by Bill of Entry. The Central Board of Excise and Customs has clarified, under Circular No. 275/109/96-CX., dated 26-11-1996, that "the period of six months should be computed from the date of payment of duty" in case of imported inputs; that this Circular has been confirmed by the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Bhopal v. Orient Paper Mills, [2001 (134) E.L.T. 774 (T)]. 5. The learned Senior Departmental Representative, further, distinguished the decisions relied upon by the learned Advocate for the Appellants by submitting that in Hamco Mining Smelting case neither the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Kusum Ingots Alloys Ltd. v. CCE, Indore [2000 (120) E.L.T. 214 (Tribunal - LB) = 2000 (39) RLT 440 (CEGAT - LB)] nor the Board's Circular were discussed; that moreover the decision has been given on the basis of hypothetica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacturer can take the credit of the duty paid on inputs under Rule 57A only when the inputs are received in the factory under the cover of any of the specified documents and the credit is taken within six months of the date of issue of any document. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal has considered these provisions in the case of Kusum Ingots and Alloys Ltd. v. CC, Indore, [2000 (120) E.L.T. 214 (Trib. - LB) = 2000 (39) RLT 440] wherein it has been held that the manufacturers are not entitled to take credit of duty beyond a period of six months from the date of duty paying documents even though they were issued prior to the amendment made by Notification No. 58/96-C.E. (N.T.), dated 29-6-96. In the light of specific provisions made in the Central Excise Rules and the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal, it cannot be claimed by anybody that this limit of six months does not apply to Bill of Entry as the same is not issued in the way in which the invoice or a Certificate is issued. The word 'issue' has been defined in the New Oxford Dictionary of English as a verb as under : "(i) Supply or distribute something; (ii) Supply someone with something". As per Law Lexico ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on. That would be the date on which the goods are passed out of Customs charge'. In the present matter, it is not the case of the Appellants that Customs charge Order was made only on or around 30-12-98. Accordingly the decision in Hamco Mining case also does not help the Appellants at all. 7. We also observe that while remanding the matter, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Order dated 13-1-2003 has also mentioned that the Board has issued clarification by Circular dated 26-11-96. As mentioned by the learned Senior Departmental Representative, as per the said Circular in the case of imported inputs, the period of six months has to be computed from the date of payment of duty. We also observe that the Appellants have not rebutted the statement made by the learned Departmental Representative that the gate passes were issued on 17-6-98. They have also not disclosed the reasons why the goods were received by them in their factory only on 30-12-98. In view of this, we hold that the provisions of sub-rule (5) of Rule 57G are applicable to the imported inputs also. As in the present matters, the credit has been taken beyond the period of six months both from the date of payment of duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
