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 on capital goods was admissible when the goods were received through dealers instead of directly from the manufacturer and the declaration was filed belatedly.
Analysis: The credit claim was governed by Rule 57T of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, which at the relevant time required capital goods to be received directly from the manufacturer and required timely declaration. The respondents had received the diesel engine set through dealers, and the declaration reached the jurisdictional office only later. The amendment brought by Notification No. 23/94-C.E.(N.T.) dated 20-5-1994 was held to apply only from that date, so the earlier restrictive requirement continued to govern the goods in question. The view that the lapse was merely procedural was rejected because the statutory conditions for availment of credit were not complied with.
Conclusion: Modvat credit was not admissible, and the Revenue's appeal succeeded.