9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igh Court : "Whether the manufacturer was entitled to make payment of duty out of the consolidated RG 23 Part II if some of the inputs were not common inputs for all the final products as electrical stampings designed for ceiling fans cannot be utilised in room coolers or washing machines and capacitors for ceiling fans cannot be used for all final products such as washing machines, room coolers or cooler fans." 2. The brief facts leading up to the filing of the appeal are that the respondents herein are manufacturers of ceiling fans, room coolers, washing machines and domestic appliances falling under Chapter 84 and 85 of the Schedule to the CETA, 1985 and were availing Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1992 (62) E.L.T. 104 (Tribunal) = 1992 (43) ECR 499. The Revenue's appeal against this order was dismissed by the Tribunal. Hence, this application for reference. 3. We have heard Shri Sanjeev Srivastava, learned DR and Shri Lachman Dev, Learned Consultant. 4. The contention of the Revenue is that as per the provisions of Rule 57F(3)(i) credit taken in respect of inputs can be utilised for payment of duty on final products in which such inputs are intended to be used which means that credit of duty taken on inputs should have been utilised for payment of duty on similar final products and since the final products are different from each other, credit has been wrongly availed. The further contention of the Revenue is that the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has no bearing on the present issue. The issue before the Larger Bench related to wrong availment of credit of duty paid on inputs used in the manufacture of final product cleared free of duty in terms of exemption Notification already in force at the time of receipt of inputs and the Tribunal held that since Rule 57C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 clearly forbids availment of input credit in respect of duty free final products, credit taken for duty free portion of the final product was erroneous and, therefore, recoverable in terms of Rule 57-I. The other decision cited by the learned DR viz. the decision in the case of United Canning Company v. CCE, Guntur reported in 1994 (74) E.L.T. 463 is also distinguishable - in that case, Modva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
