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 57Q was admissible on the capital goods used in the manufacture of cotton yarn when cotton carded/combed emerged as an intermediate product and whether Notification No. 60/94 could be applied retrospectively.
Analysis: The Tribunal followed the earlier two-Member decision holding that cotton carded/combed was a marketable intermediate product and that machinery used for obtaining such goods was hit by the exclusion under Rule 57Q. It also accepted that Notification No. 60/94 contained no indication of retrospective operation and therefore could not be applied to prior periods. The Tribunal declined to reopen additional submissions and treated the later coordinate Bench decision as binding on the facts before it.
Conclusion: Modvat credit on the disputed capital goods was not admissible, and the Department's appeal succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The assessee was denied the credit claimed on the capital goods used in the relevant manufacturing process, and the departmental challenge was accepted.
Ratio Decidendi: Where capital goods are used in producing a marketable intermediate product, Modvat credit is unavailable if the applicable notification is not retrospective and the governing rule excludes such goods.