TMI Blog1997 (2) TMI 330X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Rule 57G, the appellants herein declared in October, 1986 only nickel falling under Tariff Heading 7501.00. In this subsequent declaration they did not declare the other input namely `nickel-magnesium alloy as they had earlier done in March, 1986. 1.2 Long after i.e. on 15th September, 1992, a show cause notice was issued by the Department that Modvat credit on nickle-magnesium alloy has been taken without any declaration of the said input in their declaration filed in October, 1986. Consequently, the show cause notice proposed reversal of Modvat credit and recovery thereof since the Modvat credit taken to the tune of Rs. 7,80,170.03 had been utilised during the period March, 1992 to August, 1992. The Assistant Collector confirme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above basis, he submits that March, 1986 declaration covers their goods for availment of Modvat credit taken by them during the period March, 1992 to August, 1992. 1.4 He further submits that even the declaration made in October, 1986 also covers the said input namely nickel-magnesium alloy because the declaration of nickel against Tariff Heading 7501.00 is not only for nickel per se but would also cover nickel-magnesium alloy keeping in view Note 3 of Section XV which states that an alloy of two or more metals has to be treated for the purpose of classification is of the same metal which is predominant. In other words, nickel-magnesium alloy he submits, would be under Tariff Heading 7501.00 since nickel is predominant. Therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ration of 22nd March, 1986 as also by the declaration filed in October, 1986 on the basis of the submissions made by the ld. Advocate as already set out above. For the purposes of tariff, nickel-magnesium alloy will be covered by nickel as well in view of Section Note 3 of Section XV of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. There is no dispute about correct declaration of heading in the subsequent declaration in October, 1986. Therefore, intention of the appellant in making the Modvat credit declaration is clear. Similarly, in view of the Assistant Collector s own finding regarding description of inputs for March, 1986 declaration, it would cover the input in question and would settle the dispute in favour of the appellants. The Assistan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
