Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Saraya Distillery Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

2016 (2) TMI 184 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Denial of MODVAT credit - belated claim of credit - Held that:- In the instant case, it is not disputed by the department that the appellant was a new assessee. The appellant further contends that he was not aware of the Modvat Rules and, therefore, could not take credit. This fact has not been disputed by the respondents and, therefore, in our opinion sufficient reasons had been given by the appellant for the purpose of condoning the delay in filing the declaration form. Once sufficient reasons .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

riod. The application for condonation of delay could not have been rejected by the authorities. - Decided in favour of assessee - Central Excise Appeal No. 86 of 2004 - Dated:- 21-1-2016 - Tarun Agarwala And Vinod Kumar Misra, JJ. For the Appellant : A P Mathur For the Respondent : CSC, Dr A K Nigam, K C Sinha, R C Shukla ORDER We have heard Sri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri R.C. Shukla, learned counsel for the Department. The appeal was admitted on the following substan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in question was engaged in the manufacture of country liquor, Indian made Foreign Liquor, rectified spirit and denatured ethyl alcohol. The appellant was not aware of Modvat Rules and could not claim credit being a new assessee. When the appellant came to know, an Application dated 27th August, 1994 was filed claiming benefit of Modvat credit of duty paid on molasses for the period of 1.3.1994 to 20.7.1994 under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules. The declaration form was filed previously on 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

resent appeal has been filed. Having heard learned counsel for the parties we find that under Section 57G (5), credit cannot be taken by a manufacturer after six months of the date of issuance of any document specified in sub Rule (3), namely, on the inputs received by the manufacturer in its factory. Rule 57G (9)&(10) provides as under: (9) Where a manufacturer was, for sufficient reasons, not in a position to make a declaration under subrule (1) and makes the declaration subsequently, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ught has actually been paid on such inputs; and (iii) the inputs have actually been used or are to be used in the manufacture of final products. The aforesaid provision makes it apparently clear that if a manufacturer was not in a position to make a declaration under subrule (1) with regard to the availing Modvat credit but provides sufficient reasons, the competent authority under subrule (10) would condone the delay if he is satisfied that the inputs were received in the factory prior to six m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version