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

1997 (9) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e following three grounds :- (1) Credit taken on the strength of endorsed subsidiary gate pass : Amount involved Rs. 8,107.55. (2) Credit taken on endorsed invoice during the period 1-4-1994 to 7-7-1994 when the invoices were issued in the name of principal who was getting the goods manufactured from the appellants on job work basis and they were functioning under Notification 27/92. Amount involved Rs. 10,78,502.45. (3) Undeclared inputs. The inputs were received under the brand name of the supplier while the appellants had declared the goods by generic name : Amount involved Rs. 13,899/-. 2. Shri G. Sampath, learned Counsel for the appellants fairly conceded that so far as the endorsed subsidiary gate passes are concerned, there i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , 1944 (1 of 1944) and the rules made thereunder, in respect of the goods manufactured on behalf of the said manufacturer and, in order to enable the determination of value of the said goods under Section 4 of the said Act, to furnish information including the price at which the said manufacturer is selling the said goods and the person so authorised agrees to discharge all liabilities under the Act and the rules made thereunder. [Authority. - Notification No. 27/92-C.E. (N.T.), dated 9-10-1992] He has pleaded that in terms of this Notification, duty is required to be paid based on the information as to the price at which the goods had been sold by the manufacturer i.e. the principal manufacturer and the appellants are required to g .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the appellants are not able to show that the goods they received were not co-relatable with the description as given in the declaration. The learned SDR has no objection to this course of action. 6. We have considered the pleas made by both the sides. We observe that as it is, the appellants have accepted the payment of amount in respect of the first element above and also in respect of the third element subject to verification, they are prepared to pay the duty amount as ordered in regard to the third element. This leaves out the demand in respect of the second element i.e. receipt of the goods on endorsed invoices. Major amount is covered by our order cited supra under which it was held that endorsed invoices as such like gate passes in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pply to the gate passes. The learned JDR confirms that prior to 1-4-1994 gate passes endorsed twice were acceptable as valid documents. We therefore, hold that if the gate passes in respect of the goods in question were issued prior to 1-4-1994 and the number of endorsements on the same was no in excess of notified earlier, appellants will be entitled to the benefit of Modvat credit. Subject to the above, the appeals are allowed. The question that falls for consideration is in respect of the Modvat Credit taken beyond the period 30-6-1994 on the endorsed invoices. We observe that in the present case, the appellants had manufactured goods as loan licensee following the procedure set out under Notification 27/92, dated 9-10-1992. There is n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the relaxation as is given does no violation to the letter of the law, interpretation should be such that the purpose for which such relaxation has been given is advanced. In this view of the matter, we hold that in the present case, the appellants would be entitled to Modvat Credit based on the invoices which were received in the name of the principal manufacturer. We, therefore, allow the plea of the appellants so far as the demand in respect of the second element is concerned. 8. In regard to the first element the appellants have already accepted the liability and we therefore, confirm the same. 9. In regard to the third element in case the appellants are able to show that the gods which were received under the brand name would be co .....

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