TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court to Decide Modvat Credit Rules Interpretation</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., INDORE Versus NATIONAL STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD.</h3> COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., INDORE Versus NATIONAL STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD. - 2000 (122) E.L.T. 376 (Tribunal) Issues:1. Date of accrual of Modvat Credit under Rule 57A.2. Allowance of Modvat Credit based on invoices issued before the amendment.3. Retrospective effect of Rule amendments.Analysis:Issue 1: Date of accrual of Modvat Credit under Rule 57AThe main issue in this case revolves around determining the date of accrual of Modvat Credit under Rule 57A. The question raised is whether the date of accrual should be considered as the date of entry of stock/quantity in RG 23A Pt. I account or the date of taking duty credit in RG 23A Pt. II account. The Tribunal has been tasked with deciding this crucial point of law, which has implications for the entitlement of parties to claim Modvat Credit within a specific timeframe.Issue 2: Allowance of Modvat Credit based on invoices issued before the amendmentAnother significant issue raised is whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing Modvat Credit based on invoices issued and received much before six months of taking credit of duty in RG-23A Pt. II, especially in light of conflicting views on this matter. The Tribunal's decision to refer the issue to the High Court for resolution indicates the complexity and importance of this question regarding the retrospective application of Rule amendments and the entitlement of parties to claim credit beyond a specified time limit.Issue 3: Retrospective effect of Rule amendmentsThe issue of the retrospective effect of Rule amendments is also under scrutiny in this case. Specifically, the Tribunal is evaluating whether the amendment to Rule 57G, as highlighted in Notification No. 28/95-C.E. (N.T.) dated 29-6-1995, can be given retrospective effect. A comparison is drawn with a similar situation involving the amendment to Rule 57Q, where retrospective application was accepted. This comparison adds a layer of complexity to the interpretation of Rule amendments and their impact on the rights of parties to claim Modvat Credit.In conclusion, the Tribunal has referred these critical issues to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh for further consideration and a definitive ruling. The case involves intricate legal questions surrounding the accrual and allowance of Modvat Credit, the interpretation of Rule amendments, and the retrospective application of such amendments. The decision of the High Court will provide clarity on these matters and guide future applications and interpretations of relevant excise rules.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
