1993 (7) TMI 177

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y had taken credit prior to that date. A show, cause notice was issued for recovery of credit availed as the Department considered that once the final product had been removed from the coverage of modvat scheme, the credit of duty on inputs lying unutilised before the date of such withdrawal lapsed and could not be utilised. 2. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of Rs. 3,29,945.10 under Rule 57-1 and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 3. The lower appellate authority upheld the demand on the basis that once the item is withdrawn from the modvat scheme, the concept of final product or input loses its significance or validity with reference to aerated water w.e.f. 1-10-1987 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es Ltd. v. Union of India reported in 1991 (52) E.L.T. 222 wherein the Court has held that a right acquired under the statutory provision is not liable to be taken away retrospectively unless so provided. The relevant extract from the judgment is reproduced below : "10. While it is true that the right to get credit came into existence only on issuance of the aforesaid notifications, on a correct interpretation of Rule 57N read with Rule 57K, it will have to be held that the right to utilise the credit so earned did not come to an end the moment the said notifications were rescinded. In this context it is pertinent to note that only the aforesaid notifications have been rescinded and not Rule 57N which confers a right to utilise the credit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and soap manufactured by them after 25-8-1989." This view has been followed by the Tribunal in the case of Tripty Drinks Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bhubaneshwar reported in 1993 (63) E.L.T. 101 (Tribunal) = 1992 (20) E.T.R. 581. We also find that there is another decision to the same effect in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Guntur v. Sri Sarvaraya Sugar Bottling Unit Ltd. - 1992 (59) E.L.T. 125 (Tribunal) = 1991 (37) E.C.R. 617 wherein it has been held that there is no specific provision under modvat rules providing for recovery of modvat credit whereby if in respect of any particular commodity credit allowed is utilised under 57F and facility of modvat is withdrawn and the inputs received earlier to the date of wi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X