Modvat credit on non-prescribed certificates did not raise a referable question of law, so the reference was rejected.

A reference application seeking a question of law on extension of Modvat credit for certificates not prescribed under Rule 57G was held not to be maintainable. The Tribunal noted that its earlier view denying credit on the basis of documentary deficiency had been followed in later decisions, and that the supporting decision had already seen a reference application rejected by another bench. On that basis, and in light of the respondent's relied-upon authority, it found no referable question of law arising and rejected the application.

---

---

Issues: Whether a reference application could be maintained on the stated question of law concerning extension of Modvat credit on certificates not prescribed under Rule 57G.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that its earlier view denying credit merely because of documentary deficiency had been followed in later decisions. It also took into account that the reference application against the supporting decision had already been rejected by the East Regional Bench. In that context, and having regard to the decision relied upon by the respondent, the Tribunal held that the matter did not give rise to a question of law warranting reference.

Conclusion: The reference application was not maintainable and was rejected.

---