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 allows Modvat credit for lacquer duty, citing Rules and SC judgments, overturns Tribunal decision.</h1> <h3>VENLON POLYESTER FILM LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., BANGALORE-III</h3> VENLON POLYESTER FILM LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., BANGALORE-III - 2010 (249) E.L.T. 495 (Kar.) Issues:1. Interpretation of Modvat credit under Central Excise Act.2. Compliance with Modvat Rules regarding input lacquer utilization and job work procedures.Issue 1: Interpretation of Modvat credit under Central Excise ActThe case involved an appeal against the rejection of Modvat credit and imposition of penalty by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants claimed Modvat credit for duty paid on lacquers utilized by a job worker for lacquering polyester film. The original authority disallowed the credit, citing non-compliance with Rule 57F(2) of the Central Excise Rules. It was contended that the lacquered film did not undergo a process amounting to manufacture, and the procedure adopted was in violation of Rule 57F(3)(b). The Tribunal upheld the original authority's decision, considering the modvat scheme under Rule 57A, 57G, and 57F, along with referencing the Supreme Court judgment in Ujagar Prints.Issue 2: Compliance with Modvat Rules regarding input lacquer utilization and job work proceduresThe Tribunal confirmed the impugned order, emphasizing the procedural non-compliance and lack of entitlement to Modvat credit due to substantial rule violations. The appellants sought reference of legal questions to the High Court, which was initially rejected by the Tribunal. However, the petitioner argued for the applicability of Rule 57F in a similar case involving Maruti Udyog Ltd., highlighting the interpretation of Rule 57F(2) and the absence of fraudulent intent. The petitioner also relied on the Supreme Court's decision in International Auto Ltd. v. CCE, Bihar, emphasizing the entitlement of manufacturers to adjust credit on inputs supplied and duty paid by intermediate purchasers. The High Court, considering the previous tribunal decision and Supreme Court rulings, favored the petitioner, answering the questions of law in their favor and allowing the Modvat credit.In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner-assessee, emphasizing compliance with Modvat Rules and the entitlement to Modvat credit based on the interpretation of relevant provisions and Supreme Court judgments.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
