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

1994 (11) TMI 264

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... petitioners pleaded that the petitioners were getting the bottles supplied by M/s. Bellarpur Industries Ltd. to the printers who in turn sold the same to the petitioners and the MODVAT credit is claimed in respect of the glass bottles which have been sent by the Bellarpur Industries on sale to the printers who finally supplied the printed bottles to the petitioners on sale. He pleaded that the printer of bottles did not pay any duty on the bottles which were supplied by the Bellarpur Industries, as the printing did not amount to manufacture and pleaded that the duty suffered by the bottles in the hands of Bellarpur Industries when the printed bottles are received in the petitioners factory should be allowed MODVAT credit. He pleaded that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pleaded that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners prayer for dispensation should be allowed. 4. The learned DR pleaded that admittedly the bottles in respect of which the MODVAT credit has been claimed by the petitioners were not directly sold by the manufacturer of the bottles to the petitioners but were sold to the printer of the bottles from whom the petitioners purchased the said bottles after printing of the same. He pleaded that one of the pre-requisite for the grant of MODVAT credit is that the original gate pass under which the goods were cleared should accompany the goods to the petitioners factory subject to the dispensations regarding the endorsement on the same and transfer of the consignment in origin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he gate pass is valid for transport of the goods in respect of consignees to whom these are consigned and the mode of transport etc. prescribed. We observe that the moment the goods have been received at the consignee s end the validity of the gate pass so far as the transport of the goods is concerned, can be taken to have run out and the gate pass only remains as evidence of clearance of the goods on payment of duty and the same gate pass can only be revived by following the procedure prescribed in this regard as set out under rule 57G. Re-endorsement of gate pass in respect of part of consignment sold is not one of the prescribed modes. For bringing the goods for MODVAT purposes, the proper course for the assessee was to have had the gat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Bench cited by the petitioners would not be applicable to the facts of this case as the appellants have not complied with the requirements of Rule 57F(2) and the facts in that case were not similar to those facts in this case and as it is there is no discussion in the order in the context of application of Rule 57G or 57F(2). He pleaded that in the event of a clear ruling of this Bench in the case of M/s. Devon Plastics, the petitioners cannot be eligible to the benefit of MODVAT credit as pleaded. Therefore, they do not prima facie have a good case. 5. We have carefully considered the pleas made by the both the sides. We observe that in the present case, the bottles had been manufactured by the Bellarpur Industries and had been purchase .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e, cannot be taken prima facie to be covering the goods in question for the purpose of MODVAT credit. The petitioners plea is that the North Regional Bench has allowed the MODVAT credit in similar circumstances. As pointed out by the learned DR, the order does not deal with the aspect of the validity of the gate pass in the context of Rule 57G and the Tribunal has taken note of the facility of direct despatch of inputs to job workers. In the present case M/s. Arizona Printers are not job workers of the appellants. The learned Counsel drew our attention to the trade notice issued by the Bombay Collectorate. It has not been shown that the requirements of the trade notice regarding the procedure to be followed in terms of Rule 57F(2) have bee .....

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