TMI Blog2006 (10) TMI 295X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order (for the Bench)]. The appellant has challenged the order dated 30-8-2004 made by the Commissioner (Appeals) upholding the order-in-original dated 30-11-99 of the Assistant Commissioner confirming the demand of Rs. 7975/- being the amount of Modvat credit wrongly availed against the appellant and imposing a penalty of Rs. 3000/-. 2. The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, 1944. According to the Revenue, Modvat credit of Rs. 8,395/- was wrongly taken and availed by the party in contravention of the provisions of Rules 173H, 52-A, and 57-G of the said rules. 3. The appellant contended that under the Modvat scheme any goods which were used in or in relation to the manufacture of the final product would become input . When such inputs are duty paid and used in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 29-12-98. Under Rule 57G (1) of the said rules, it is, inter alia, provided that the manufacturer intending to take credit of the duty paid on inputs under Rule 57A or 57B shall file a declaration before the concerned Assistant Commissioner indicating the description of the final products manufactured in his factory and the inputs intended to be used in the said final products and obtain an ack ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation for condonation of delay was made by the appellant, as recorded in the impugned order. 6. It is obvious that the appellant was not entitled to take Modvat credit in violation of the provisions of Rule 57G(1). The impugned demand and penalty have, therefore, rightly been confirmed under the impugned order. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. (Dictated and pronounced in the open Court on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
