Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 the transferee of an advance licence was required to prove that the original exporter had not availed input-stage credit so as to retain the benefit of Notification No. 203/1992-Cus. dated 19.05.1992.
Analysis: The licences had been transferred by the original exporters with due authorisation by the competent authority. In the absence of any allegation of forgery or falsification of the licences or their transfer, the presumption was that the authority had satisfied itself regarding compliance with the notification conditions. The obligation to establish non-availment of Modvat credit on the exported goods lay on the original licence holder and not on the transferee. The demand could not be sustained by placing on the appellant an impossible burden to prove the conduct of the transferor, and the cited precedent supported this position.
Conclusion: The transferee was not liable to prove non-availment of Modvat credit by the original exporter, and the denial of exemption was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an advance licence is validly transferred, the transferee cannot be saddled with the burden of proving that the original exporter did not avail credit, unless the Revenue establishes a legal basis for denial of the exemption.