Modvat credit denied on design and development charges not constituting excisable inputs under the scheme.

Modvat credit was held unavailable on duty purportedly paid on design and development charges because those charges were not excisable goods and did not qualify as eligible inputs under the governing rule. The tariff classification used for duty payment was found incorrect, and credit under the scheme could be claimed only where duty had been paid on excisable inputs that actually answered the description of input. The cited precedent was distinguished on facts, as that matter involved duty collected along with supplied components and required factual enquiry, whereas no excisable manufacture existed here.

---

---

Issues: Whether duty paid on design and development charges, which were not excisable goods, could qualify for Modvat credit under the input scheme.

Analysis: Design and development charges were held not to be excisable goods, and their classification under a tariff sub-heading for the purpose of duty payment was found to be incorrect. The benefit of Modvat credit was available only where the duty had been paid on excisable inputs that were eligible under the governing rule and actually answered the description of input under the scheme. The cited precedent was distinguished because, in that case, the duty on design and development charges had been collected along with supplied components and the matter required factual enquiry, whereas here the entity raising such charges was not manufacturing any excisable goods at all.

Conclusion: Modvat credit on duty paid on design and development charges was not admissible, and the Revenue's appeal succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Credit under the Modvat scheme cannot be allowed on duty purportedly paid on items or charges that are not excisable goods and are not eligible inputs under the governing rule.

---