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, for purposes of waiver of pre-deposit, the appellant was entitled to transfer unutilized Modvat credit under Rule 57F(20) and Rule 57F(21) when the original factory had shifted and the processed inputs were received at the new premises through job workers.
Analysis: The application arose from a dispute over the scope of Rule 57F(21), which required transfer of stock of inputs along with the factory to the new site. The appellant had sent inputs for job work under Rule 57F, debited duty thereon, and after the original premises were destroyed by fire, shifted to a new registered premises. The processed goods were received at the new unit and credit was sought to be taken back. On a prima facie view, the semi-processed stock had effectively moved from the old unit to the new unit through the job workers' premises, and a rigid literal reading of the sub-rule would create an unintended hardship where credit exists but no physical stock of inputs remains at the old site.
Outcome: Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted.