2007 (1) TMI 442 - AT - Central Excise

Modvat credit denial overturned, reexamination ordered on duty payment date

JCT LIMITED Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JALANDHAR

The Tribunal set aside the denial of Modvat credit for availing credit after 6 months, directing a reexamination based on the duty payment date. The ... Cenvat/Modvat - Limitation for taking Issues: Denial of Modvat credit for availing credit after 6 months in violation of Rule 57G of Central Excise Rules, 1944.Analysis:1. The appellant filed an appeal for the denial of Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,93,413/- for availing credit after 6 months based on a photocopy of the triplicate copy of the bill of entry, which was deemed a violation of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.2. The appellant's representative argued that as per Circular No. 275/109/96-C.E., the 6-month period for availing Modvat credit should be calculated from the date of payment of duty. They contended that the credit was taken within the stipulated time frame from the date of payment. The appellant had shown the triplicate copy of the bill of entry to Departmental officers and sent it to the supplier for endorsement, which unfortunately got lost in transit. The supplier later endorsed the bill in favor of the appellant as confirmed by a letter dated 10-7-1996.3. The Departmental Representative (D.R.) supported the Commissioner (Appeals) findings, arguing that the case laws cited by the appellant were not applicable. The D.R. highlighted that the appellant failed to reconstruct the bill of entry copy despite requesting time, making the credit inadmissible based on a photocopy of the triplicate bill.4. The Tribunal, after considering both sides' arguments and reviewing the record, agreed with the appellant's stance that the 6-month period should be calculated from the duty payment date. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's claim that they had produced the triplicate copy to the Departmental officers and sent it for endorsement to the supplier within the stipulated time frame. The Tribunal referenced a similar case and directed the adjudicating authority to reexamine the documents and decide the matter in light of the precedent, providing the appellants with a personal hearing opportunity.5. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority for further examination based on the principles established in the referenced case law. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, ensuring a fair reconsideration of the Modvat credit denial issue.