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

2009 (11) TMI 302

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... HSD oil from the category of inputs on which the benefit of excise paid can be taken, the petitioner was not entitled to claim Modvat credit on this item. Hence, the petitioner was not entitled to claim credit of the excise paid on HSD oil which had been specifically excluded. - 107 of 1998 - - - Dated:- 18-11-2009 - Deepak Gupta and V.K. Ahuja, JJ. S/Shri R.L. Sood, Senior Advocate with Sanjeev Kumar and Arjun Lal, Advocates, for the Petitioner, Shri Sandeep Sharma, A.S.G., for the Respondent. [Judgment per: Deepak Gupta, J.]. - A short but interesting question of law arises for decision in this appeal. The point which arises for consideration is whether High Speed Diesel (HSD) utilized by the Petitioners Company as a fuel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n No. 5/94 specifically excludes High Speed Diesel Oil classifiable under Heading No. 27.10 from the list of eligible inputs under item (iv) of Column 2 of the Table appended to the Notification." 4. The petitioner has also alleged that Rule 578 of the Rules which was brought into the statute book in the year 1997 widens the scope of the word in puts and inputs used as fuel are eligible for Modvat credit. According to the petitioner the notification issued under Rule 57A excluding HSD is of no consequence since Rule 57B starts with a non-obstante clause and specifically includes fuels in the category of inputs and in any event such a notification cannot override the provisions of Rule 57B. 5. On the other hand the stand of the Respo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... also specify in the said notification the goods or classes of goods in respect of which the credit of specified duly may be restricted. (4) The credit of specified duty under this section shall be allowed on inputs used in the manufacture of final products as well as on inputs used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final products whether directly or indirectly and whether contained in the final product or not. (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette declare the inputs on which declared duties of excise or additional duty (hereinafter referred to as declared duty) paid shall be deemed to have been paid at such rate or equivalent to such amount .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... packing materials are made provided the cost of such packing materials is included in the value of the final product; (vi) accessories for the final product cleared along with such final product, the value of which is included in the assessable value of the final product. Explanation. - For the purposes of this sub-rule, it is hereby clarified that the term 'inputs' refers only to such inputs as may be specified in a notification issued under Rule 57A." 7. A bare reading of Rule 57A(1) clearly shows that the provisions of the section apply in respect of finished excisable goods as the Central Government may specify by notification. The notification deals not only with the final products but also with the inputs. Clause (5) of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 481 = (2007) 7 SCC 347. In that case the only question which was decided was that the Low Sulphur Heavy Stock used by the assessee for fuel generating electricity is an input within the meaning of Rule 57A. No question was raised before the Apex Court as to what is the effect of a notification issued under Rule 57A whereby some inputs have been specifically excluded like in the present case. We may also point out that the Apex Court was considering Rule 57A as it stood prior to its amendment on 1st March, 1997. The language of Rules 57A and 57B which are under consideration in the present case is totally different from the language of Rule 57A as it stood before its amendment. 11. In any event here we are only considering the question a .....

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