Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise Ahmedabad-I Versus Balkrishna Textiles Mills Pvt. Ltd.

2016 (6) TMI 354 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Whether the bar imposed under Rule 57G(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for availment of credit within a period of six months would be applicable in relation to deemed credit availed under Rule 57G(5) and Notification No.29/96 issued thereunder - Held that:- Rule 57G(5) of the rules provides for a period of limitation of six months from the date of issue of any document specified in sub-rule (3) thereof for the purpose of taking credit. Adverting to Notification No.29/96, it may be noted tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n would commence from the date of issuance of the documents specified in sub-rule (3) thereof, whereas, insofar as the availment of deemed credit under Notification No.29/96 is concerned, provision is made for availing the same without any document evidencing payment of duty on the inputs. Under the circumstances, in the absence of any documents specified in sub-rule (3) of rule 57G of the rules being available for the purpose of availment of deemed credit, the limitation would not commence to r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

months. But neither sub-rule (5) of rule 57A of the rules under which Notification No.29/96 has been issued provides for any limitation for availment of the benefit under the notification, nor does Notification No.29/96 provide for any such limitation. However, merely because rule 57A(5) or Notification 29/96 do not provide for a limitation for availing of the benefit of deemed credit, the limitation under rule 57G(5) of the rules cannot be read into the scheme of rule 57A(5). Therefore, the Tr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder dated 12.01.2005 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ). 2. While admitting the appeal, this court by an order dated 23.08.2006, had formulated the following substantial question of law: Whether the bar imposed under Rule 57(G) for taking credit availment with period of 6 months is mandatory or not? 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, the court is of the view that the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Made Fabrics falling under Chapter 52, 54 and 55 of the Central Excise Tariff, 1985. The assessee, being an independent processor, was availing and utilizing deemed credit at the rate specified as per Condition No.3 of Notification No.29/96-CE (NT) dated 03.09.1996 prior to introduction of the compounded levy scheme in respect of independent processors under section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). During the course of assessment of RT-12 for the month o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted 18.06.1999 came to be issued to the assessee calling upon it to show cause as to why wrongly availed deemed credit to the tune of ₹ 46,97,771/- should not be recovered under rule 57(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the rules ) read with section 11A of the Act, and as to why penalty should not be imposed under section 173Q for violation of rule 57A of the rules. 5. By an Order-in-Original dated 24.09.1999, the adjudicating authority disallowed the deemed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

observing that the assessee had not utilized the same for discharge of its duty liability and the credit was taken only on 12.12.1998 in the deemed credit register. The assessee carried the matter in further appeal before the Tribunal and succeeded. 6. Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, learned Central Government Counsel for the appellant, assailed the impugned order by submitting that the Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred under sub-rule (2) of rule 57A of the rules, issued Notification No .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y. The emphasis being that the credit could be availed at the time of clearance of the final products . It was pointed out that though Notification No.29/96 has no prescribed time limit for availing the credit, rule 57G(5) of the rules already prescribed a time limit of six months for availing the credit. Referring to the contents of the said rule, it was submitted that the same makes it explicitly clear that the time limit within which a manufacturer could take the credit was six months from th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

notification is required to be read in consonance with the rules since it gets its force and power by the rules and hence, the language of the rules is what ought to be looked at and construed strictly. It was submitted that there is no ambiguity whatsoever in terms of the language in rule 57G(5) of the rules. 6.1 Next, it was contended that even if it is considered that since this is a case of deemed credit and credit is admissible without producing documents evidencing payment of duty and hen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was pointed out that by a Notification No.44/98 dated 10.12.1998 issued by the Central Government under sub-rule (2) of rule 57A of the rules, the earlier Notification No.29/96 came to be modified by introducing paragraphs 7B and 7C. As an outcome of the said notification, the benefit of deemed credit would cease to be available to those manufacturers (independent processors) under the earlier notification, that is, notification No.29/96, if they failed to clear their final products on or after .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Osram Surya (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore, (2002) 9 SCC 20, for the proposition that by introducing a limitation in rule 57G, the statute has not taken away any of the vested rights accrued to the manufacturers under the scheme of MODVAT. That vested right continues to be in existence and what is restricted is the time within which the manufacturer has to enforce that right. Further, th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

duty actually paid on inputs would be allowed as Cenvat credit. It was submitted that rule 57G is relatable to rule 57A(1) of the rules and provides for the manner of taking credit of duty paid on inputs under rule 57A. It was submitted that in the present case, the notification in question provides for deemed credit as contemplated under sub-rule (5) of rule 57A of the rules, which is a separate provision. Referring to the notification issued under sub-rule (2) of rule 57A of the rules, it was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

not be available. It was argued that it is not the case of the revenue that during the period July 1997 to April 1998, the goods have not been exported. It was submitted that the fact that the final products have been exported after following due procedure, is not in dispute. The fact regarding duty actually leviable or payable on the final product is also not in dispute. Further, there is no dispute as regards the amount. All the transactions are accounted for. The only objection of the revenue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat under rule 57A(1) and 57G, credit is taken when the inputs are received, whereas under the notification issued under rule 57A(5), deemed credit can be availed at the time of clearance of the products. It was submitted that in the present case, the benefit is not sought to be denied on the ground that it was not otherwise available to the assessee, but only on the ground that it could not have been availed after seventeen months. It was submitted that there is no undue advantage to the assess .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rsity in the findings recorded by the Tribunal, there would be no warrant for interference. 7.2 Insofar as reliance placed by the learned counsel for the appellant on Notification No.44/98-CE (NT) dated 10.12.1998 is concerned, it was pointed out that paragraphs 7B and 7C thereof do not have any relevance insofar as the facts of the present case are concerned. It was further submitted that the said notification does not provide anything contrary to the interest of the assessee. It was submitted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sub-rule (5) of rule 57A of the rules opens with a non-obstante clause and lays down that the scheme applies to those goods where the declared inputs are not used directly by the manufacturer of final product. The scheme, under sub-rule (5) of rule 57A of the rules, applies to those cases where inputs are not used by the processor directly. The inputs are not received in the factory, and therefore, the question of inputs being received in the factory under invoice would not arise. It was submitt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is a conscious departure insofar as rule 57A(5) is concerned, and it is not subject to section AA of the rules. Referring to Notification No.29/96, it was submitted that the same makes provision for all eventualities and is a complete code in itself and that the other provisions of section AA of the rules would not apply and consequently, the provisions of rule 57G(5) would not be applicable in the facts of the present case. 7.3 To bolster his submissions, the learned counsel placed reliance upo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

favour of the assessee. Reliance was also placed upon the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Surat-I v. Swagat Synthetics, 2008 (232) ELT 413 (Guj.). It was, accordingly, urged that the appeal being devoid of merits, deserves to be dismissed and that the question is required to be answered in favour of the assessee. 8. From the question as formulated by this court at the time of admission of the appeal, the scope of the appeal is limited to the adju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

products) as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf for the purpose of allowing credit of any duty of excise or the additional duty under section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), as may be specified in the said notification (hereafter, in this section, referred to as the specified duty) paid on the goods used in the manufacture of the said final products (hereafter, in this section, referred to as the input). On an analysis of r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cessary to advert to the same. Sub-rule (5) of rule 57A of the rules reads thus: (5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette declare the inputs on which declared duties of excise or additional duty (hereinafter referred to as declared duty) paid shall be deemed to have been paid at such rate or equivalent to such amount as may be specified in the said notification and allow the credit of such declared duty deemed to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uts on which declared duties of excise or additional duty paid shall be deemed to have been paid at such rate or equivalent to such amount as may be specified. The credit may be allowed of such declared duty deemed to have been paid in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be specified, even if the declared inputs are not used directly by the manufacturer of final products declared in the said notification, but are contained in the said final products. 12. On a conjoint reading of su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le. 13. Thus, on a plain reading of sub-rule (5) of rule 57A of the rules, it is evident that credit is required to be allowed in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be specified. These conditions are not specified in the rules and hence, one has to look at the notification to find out the conditions subject to which deemed credit can be allowed. A perusal of Notification No.29/96 shows that paragraph 1 of the said notification specifies the inputs and the final products covered un .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ere is nothing therein to suggest any limitation as regards availment of deemed credit. 14. As noticed earlier, the provisions of section AA apply to the finished excisable goods notified by the Central Government under rule 57A(1) of the rules. Insofar as the inputs on which declared duties are deemed to have been paid as notified under sub-rule (5) of rule 57 are concerned, the provisions of section AA have not been made applicable. Therefore, the provisions of rule 57G cannot be made applicab .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. Sub-rule (2) provides that a manufacturer who has filed a declaration under sub-rule (1) may, after obtaining the acknowledgment, take credit of the duty on the inputs received by him. Sub-rule (3) provides that no credit under sub-rule (2) shall be taken by the manufacturer unless the inputs are received in the factory under the cover of any of the documents enumerated thereunder. Sub-rule (4) provides that no credit shall be taken by the manufacturer in respect of invoices referred to in cla .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e manufacturer after six months of the date of issue of any document specified in sub-rule (3) . Therefore, sub-rule (5) is in addition to what is provided under sub-rule (4) thereof, namely, no credit shall be taken by the manufacturer in respect of invoices referred to in clause (g) of sub-rule (3) after 30th September, 1996 . Moreover, on a plain reading of sub-rule (5) of rule 57G of the rules, it is apparent that the same applies to those manufacturers who intend to take credit of duty paid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

edit of the declared duty deemed to have been paid shall be allowed to the manufacturer of final products, without production of documents evidencing payment of duty on the said inputs at the time of clearance of final products. Thus, under the scheme of the notification, deemed credit can be availed of without production of documents evidencing payment of duty on the inputs. Thus, for the purpose of applicability of sub-rule (5) of rule 57G, the limitation would commence from the date of issuan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rned. Consequently, it would not be possible to apply sub-rule (5) of rule 57G of the rules to the facts of the present case. 17. Insofar as the reliance placed upon the subsequent notification dated 10.12.1998 for the purpose of imputing mala fide motives to the assessee of availment of deemed Cenvat credit only in view of the new notification having been issued is concerned, in the opinion of this court while examining the applicability or otherwise of a statutory provision under a taxing stat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that credit shall also not be taken by the manufacturer after six months of the date of issue of any document specified in sub-rule (3) thereof and where intermediate products manufactured by the user of inputs specified under rule 57 are received by the manufacturer, after nine months. But neither sub-rule (5) of rule 57A of the rules under which Notification No.29/96 has been issued provides for any limitation for availment of the benefit under the notification, nor does Notification No.29/96 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version