Modvat credit on exported goods: duty-paid indigenous inputs used under AR4 and bond could not support later credit claim.

Modvat credit was confined to duty paid on inputs used in relation to final products liable to excise duty, so it could not be claimed for indigenous inputs used in goods exported under AR4 and bond without payment of duty. The export cycle involving imported inputs, CVD and drawback was treated as distinct from the cycle of duty paid indigenous inputs, and the two could not be mixed. The AR4 declaration was required to prevent credit being taken on the inputs used for the exported goods, and later availing of credit on those inputs was impermissible. Accordingly, the demand and penalty were sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be claimed on duty-paid indigenous inputs used in goods exported under AR4 and bond without payment of excise duty, and whether subsequent reliance on drawback or imported replenishment could sustain such credit.

Analysis: Rule 57A allowed credit only for utilisation towards duty of excise leviable on the final products. The finished goods in question did not suffer excise duty because they were exported under AR4 and bond. The Court treated the export cycle based on imported inputs on CVD and drawback as distinct from the cycle of duty-paid indigenous inputs and payment of excise duty, and held that the two could not be mixed. It further held that the declaration in AR4 was required to negate availing of Modvat credit in relation to the inputs used for the exported goods, not merely at the moment of declaration, and that later taking of credit on those very inputs was impermissible.

Conclusion: Modvat credit was not admissible, the demand and penalty were rightly sustained, and the challenge by the assessee failed.

---