Modvat credit reversal before export satisfies exemption condition despite certificate being issued by a Superintendent.

Reversal of Modvat credit before export satisfied condition V(A) of Notification No. 203/92-Cus because the substantive requirement was that input-stage credit should not be availed. The credit was reversed at the time of export and that reversal was endorsed on the AR4, with a certificate produced from the jurisdictional Superintendent. The only objection was that the certificate was not issued by the Assistant Commissioner, but that did not affect the admitted fact of reversal. The exemption could not be denied on a merely formal objection to the certifying authority where the substantive condition had been met.

---

---

Issues: Whether reversal of Modvat credit before export satisfied condition V(A) of Notification No. 203/92-Cus despite the certificate being issued by the jurisdictional Superintendent instead of the Assistant Commissioner.

Analysis: The appellant had availed Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, but the credit was reversed at the time of export and that reversal was endorsed on the AR4. A certificate evidencing the reversal was also produced from the jurisdictional Superintendent. The objection taken below was confined to the certifying authority and not to the factum of reversal. Since condition V(A) required that input-stage credit should not be availed, the reversal of credit met the substantive requirement of the notification. The designation of the officer issuing the certificate did not alter the admitted fact that the credit stood reversed.

Conclusion: Condition V(A) of Notification No. 203/92-Cus was complied with, and the exemption could not be denied on the ground that the certificate was not issued by an Assistant Commissioner.

---