Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the bar under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 applied when the assessee had not taken credit of the duty paid on yarn under Rule 57A and Rule 57G, and whether the disallowance of re-credit required reconsideration.
Analysis: The claim was that since no credit of duty on the yarn had been availed, the procedural route and restrictions under Rule 57F(4) did not govern the movement of goods to the job worker and the corresponding re-credit. On the material then before the Tribunal, this contention appeared to have merit. At the same time, the factual assertion that credit had in fact not been taken required verification before final relief could be granted.
Conclusion: The restriction under Rule 57F(4) would not operate if the duty credit had not been taken, but the factual position had to be verified.
Final Conclusion: The matter was sent back for limited factual verification, and the appeal succeeded only to that extent.
Ratio Decidendi: Where Modvat credit has not been availed, the procedural bar tied to re-credit under Rule 57F(4) does not apply, subject to verification of the factual basis.