Just a moment...
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 Rule 57B of the Central Excise Rules applied to inputs lying in stock when the manufacturer obtained acknowledgment of the declaration under Rule 57G and, consequently, whether transitional credit at the higher rate under Rule 57B could be availed for such stock.
Analysis: Rule 57G permitted credit only after acknowledgment of the declaration, while Rule 57H governed credit for inputs received or lying in stock before such acknowledgment and limited that credit to duty actually paid. Rule 57B was intended to confer a higher credit rate only where the manufacturer chose to procure inputs from small scale manufacturers after opting for the Modvat scheme. The rule-making scheme showed a conscious distinction between inputs acquired before declaration and those acquired thereafter, and there was no basis to read Rule 57B into the transitional mechanism under Rule 57H. The higher credit under Rule 57B could not be applied retrospectively to inputs already in stock when the declaration was acknowledged.
Conclusion: Rule 57B was not applicable to inputs lying in stock at the time of acknowledgment of the declaration, and the claim for transitional credit at the higher rate failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Transitional Modvat credit for inputs in stock before acknowledgment of declaration is confined to duty actually paid under the transitional provision, and a higher credit benefit intended for post-declaration procurement from small scale manufacturers cannot be applied retrospectively.