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 MODVAT credit under Rule 57A could be denied merely because duty on the inputs was paid by the supplier after the inputs were received in the factory, and whether the matter required remand for consideration of the remaining conditions under the MODVAT scheme.
Analysis: Rule 57E, as it then stood, dealt with adjustment of credit where duty already paid on inputs was subsequently varied by refund. It did not specifically cover the situation where the supplier paid duty later on inputs earlier cleared at nil duty. Rule 57A, however, contemplated credit of duty paid on inputs for use in the manufacture of final products, and did not prescribe that the duty must necessarily have been paid before receipt of the inputs. On that basis, the timing of payment of duty by the supplier was not, by itself, a bar to availing MODVAT credit. At the same time, the record did not establish compliance with the declaration requirement under Rule 57G, and the claim under Rule 57H could not be finally examined for want of necessary facts.
Conclusion: The subsequent payment of duty after receipt of the inputs did not preclude MODVAT credit under Rule 57A, but the matter had to be remanded for fresh consideration of the assessee's entitlement under the remaining procedural requirements.